Chainflip broker intercepts Bitget hacker transfer
The Bitget hacker attempted to move around 100 SOL via Chainflip, but the relevant broker refused to process it, seemingly intercepted by risk controls. Market interpretations are divided between bullish and bearish: sentiment toward BGB and centralized exchanges’ security trust remains slightly bearish, but Chainflip’s risk-control image as cross-chain exchange infrastructure is somewhat more bullish. On September 29, MistTrack disclosed that the relevant addresses tried to transfer funds through the cross-chain protocol Chainflip. After deposits went into and out of the Chainflip Vault in the early hours of September 29, they were returned to the attacker’s address. The interface indicated the reason as “The deposit was rejected by the broker.” The key point here isn’t a routine cross-chain failure, but whether the routing party is willing to proactively reject high-risk addresses after stolen funds enter a laundering route. For short-term traders, continue to watch for Bitget’s compensation, the resumption of withdrawals, and whether the hacker’s funds shift to other cross-chain channels. If the interception expands, the probability of recovery or freezing will increase, but it will also make the scrutiny boundaries for cross-chain protocols a renewed point of contention.
Source: BlockBeats
#BGB #FLIP
Figure 1: Chainflip broker intercepts Bitget hacker transfer · partial screenshot of the source page
Image source: https://www.theblockbeats.info/flash/369467
The Bitget hacker attempted to move around 100 SOL via Chainflip, but the relevant broker refused to process it, seemingly intercepted by risk controls. Market interpretations are divided between bullish and bearish: sentiment toward BGB and centralized exchanges’ security trust remains slightly bearish, but Chainflip’s risk-control image as cross-chain exchange infrastructure is somewhat more bullish. On September 29, MistTrack disclosed that the relevant addresses tried to transfer funds through the cross-chain protocol Chainflip. After deposits went into and out of the Chainflip Vault in the early hours of September 29, they were returned to the attacker’s address. The interface indicated the reason as “The deposit was rejected by the broker.” The key point here isn’t a routine cross-chain failure, but whether the routing party is willing to proactively reject high-risk addresses after stolen funds enter a laundering route. For short-term traders, continue to watch for Bitget’s compensation, the resumption of withdrawals, and whether the hacker’s funds shift to other cross-chain channels. If the interception expands, the probability of recovery or freezing will increase, but it will also make the scrutiny boundaries for cross-chain protocols a renewed point of contention.
Source: BlockBeats
#BGB #FLIP
Figure 1: Chainflip broker intercepts Bitget hacker transfer · partial screenshot of the source page
Image source: https://www.theblockbeats.info/flash/369467
