@BabylonLabs_io I checked Babylon metadata from the obvious side first. A Bitcoin TXID looked like proof because the transaction either exist or it does not. But that check is weak. A valid transaction can still fund the wrong output wrong script or a vault that only looks connected.

The real issue is binding. The protocol can read a vault ID but it must prove this exact ID belongs to this exact TXID. BABY cannot place two correct fields beside each other and assume the relationship is true. That is where neat data turn dangerous.

Then comes the transaction itself. Was the right value sent? Did the output use the expected script? Are the spending conditions the ones the vault agreed too? Some complexity is normal and metadata was never suppose to carry trust alone.

The borrowed token adds another quiet problem. A symbol may match while the asset contract issuer or denomination is different. It may read the right name and still identify the wrong asset which feel small until debt starts moving.

I do not think this makes BABY broken. The real test is whether Babylon proves every link not just every field. If the TXID vault ID output and asset look valid alone who proves they truly belong together?

#baby $BABY