#xrp账本修复可增发xrp的漏洞
👉 公链安全怎么看，币安聊天室跟进
The XRP Ledger fixed a decade-old bug.
At a glance, this vulnerability could create XRP out of thin air.
The supply cap: 1.8 trillion tokens.
The researchers received a bounty.
$250,000.
First, let's look at the vulnerability itself.
The problem lay in a piece of logic from the ledger's early days.
As originally written, certain transactions could bypass the supply cap.
This code had been running for nearly ten years, and no one had noticed.
The fix was rushed into production.
So where's the controversy?
Some node operators say the patch was pushed through without prior notice.
The foundation says the notification process followed the agreed-upon protocol.
At the root of the disagreement is governance.
Who should get to press the button on an emergency fix?
In decentralized networks, there's no standard answer to this kind of question.
The gap between the bounty and the potential damage has also drawn criticism.
If exploited, the vulnerability could have been worth $94 billion.
The final reward was $250,000.
Some people think that ratio doesn't look great.
For crypto, it's a good thing that ledgers can be audited. The downside is that fixes are always accompanied by controversy.
Who do you think should decide on emergency patches to public blockchains? Share your thoughts in the comments.
👉 公链安全怎么看，币安聊天室跟进
The XRP Ledger fixed a decade-old bug.
At a glance, this vulnerability could create XRP out of thin air.
The supply cap: 1.8 trillion tokens.
The researchers received a bounty.
$250,000.
First, let's look at the vulnerability itself.
The problem lay in a piece of logic from the ledger's early days.
As originally written, certain transactions could bypass the supply cap.
This code had been running for nearly ten years, and no one had noticed.
The fix was rushed into production.
So where's the controversy?
Some node operators say the patch was pushed through without prior notice.
The foundation says the notification process followed the agreed-upon protocol.
At the root of the disagreement is governance.
Who should get to press the button on an emergency fix?
In decentralized networks, there's no standard answer to this kind of question.
The gap between the bounty and the potential damage has also drawn criticism.
If exploited, the vulnerability could have been worth $94 billion.
The final reward was $250,000.
Some people think that ratio doesn't look great.
For crypto, it's a good thing that ledgers can be audited. The downside is that fixes are always accompanied by controversy.
Who do you think should decide on emergency patches to public blockchains? Share your thoughts in the comments.