🦖 After rejecting a hacker’s $50 million exchange request, the platform was breached itself within 24 hours
🚨 行情变了群里说
The cross-chain exchange protocol NEAR Intents was attacked today, with losses of about $3.8 million. The official team has paused services, freezing deposits and withdrawals across 11 chains at once, and promising to fully reimburse the affected funds.
The most heartbreaking part is the timeline: last week it loudly announced that its own risk-control system SHIELD had blocked an exchange request of over $50 million related to a $387 million stolen-asset case—freezing $503,000 and letting only $166,000 slip through. As a result, it turned into the next target.💥
According to the official explanation, the issue lies in the interaction logic between the Omni deposit/withdrawal system and the smart contracts; the contract-side vulnerability has already been patched. On-chain sleuth ZachXBT noted that the earliest abnormal withdrawals came from a BNB Chain hot wallet; the stolen funds were then transferred to an exchange, and subsequently cross-chained to become Bitcoin. NEAR tokens dropped by about 6% in 24 hours.⚠️
Numbers better show the scale: the platform claims it has processed transactions totaling over $30 billion and covered 35 chains. This time, 11 chains were affected: BNB Chain, Polygon, TON, Optimism, Avalanche, Stellar, Monad, X Layer, Scroll, ADI, and Plasma.🔗
Look at the whole year—this is just a slice. In DefiLlama’s statistics, the first major cases so far this year are, in order: a certain exchange at about $387 million, Liquid Network at about $320 million, Drift at about $295 million, and Kelp at about $293 million. Total crypto theft across the third quarter reached $1.26 billion across 247 incidents; September alone accounted for about $769 million. In that pile of figures, $3.8 million is almost negligible.
But what I care about isn’t the amount—it’s the switch. A protocol that can identify and stop hacker funds shows that the routing behind it is actually supported by centralized risk control. This time it got hit itself, too, which also indicates that code-level exposure won’t disappear just because it’s “on the right side.” Permissionless has always come with conditions.
Translation: cross-chain protocols are becoming the battlefield with the best hacker cost-effectiveness—one vulnerability, and multiple chains opened up at once. For users, what really matters isn’t “will it reimburse,” but “will it dare to reject hackers next time?”
If cross-chain protocols get into trouble like this, should the platform fully cover the losses? Discuss it in the comments.
Click the avatar to watch the live stream
Every day, I’ll keep you updated on key crypto security hotspots—not just what happened, but also help you understand the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀
🚨 行情变了群里说
The cross-chain exchange protocol NEAR Intents was attacked today, with losses of about $3.8 million. The official team has paused services, freezing deposits and withdrawals across 11 chains at once, and promising to fully reimburse the affected funds.
The most heartbreaking part is the timeline: last week it loudly announced that its own risk-control system SHIELD had blocked an exchange request of over $50 million related to a $387 million stolen-asset case—freezing $503,000 and letting only $166,000 slip through. As a result, it turned into the next target.💥
According to the official explanation, the issue lies in the interaction logic between the Omni deposit/withdrawal system and the smart contracts; the contract-side vulnerability has already been patched. On-chain sleuth ZachXBT noted that the earliest abnormal withdrawals came from a BNB Chain hot wallet; the stolen funds were then transferred to an exchange, and subsequently cross-chained to become Bitcoin. NEAR tokens dropped by about 6% in 24 hours.⚠️
Numbers better show the scale: the platform claims it has processed transactions totaling over $30 billion and covered 35 chains. This time, 11 chains were affected: BNB Chain, Polygon, TON, Optimism, Avalanche, Stellar, Monad, X Layer, Scroll, ADI, and Plasma.🔗
Look at the whole year—this is just a slice. In DefiLlama’s statistics, the first major cases so far this year are, in order: a certain exchange at about $387 million, Liquid Network at about $320 million, Drift at about $295 million, and Kelp at about $293 million. Total crypto theft across the third quarter reached $1.26 billion across 247 incidents; September alone accounted for about $769 million. In that pile of figures, $3.8 million is almost negligible.
But what I care about isn’t the amount—it’s the switch. A protocol that can identify and stop hacker funds shows that the routing behind it is actually supported by centralized risk control. This time it got hit itself, too, which also indicates that code-level exposure won’t disappear just because it’s “on the right side.” Permissionless has always come with conditions.
Translation: cross-chain protocols are becoming the battlefield with the best hacker cost-effectiveness—one vulnerability, and multiple chains opened up at once. For users, what really matters isn’t “will it reimburse,” but “will it dare to reject hackers next time?”
If cross-chain protocols get into trouble like this, should the platform fully cover the losses? Discuss it in the comments.
Click the avatar to watch the live stream
Every day, I’ll keep you updated on key crypto security hotspots—not just what happened, but also help you understand the logic and opportunities behind it 👀🚀
