Let’s further consider the logical possibilities of Venus Protocol being attacked: 1) Security experts say that some big investors were phished. Conventional wisdom suggests that they could just withdraw funds directly with the private key. How could there be a flash loan? Most likely, the hacker obtained updateDelegate authorization through social engineering, gaining access to the account of a large investor, but without immediate liquidity to withdraw. In layman's terms, the hacker obtained the authority, but the large investor only had collateral, not the borrowed funds. The hacker had to find a way to obtain the collateral of the large investor. 2) Is it that the individual phishing incidents involving the major investor have nothing to do with the Venus contract? As mentioned earlier, if the hacker discovered that the major investor's account had no liquidity, their efforts would normally be in vain. But why was it possible to withdraw collateral through a simple flash loan attack? The answer lies in the Venus contract mechanism. The hacker may have used flash loans and a series of vToken cross-platform exchange rate differences to help the major investor repay the collateral and even withdraw some extra. Simply put, it is true that the collateral of the big investors was stolen, but it is very likely that it will become a bad debt of the Venus contract platform, unless the big investors are stupid enough to pay back the platform. 3) While other users' funds are temporarily safe, the Venus platform faces significant liability concerns. While the attack was triggered by a large investor being phished by a social engineering scheme, the platform ultimately profited. The $30 million stolen is likely to become bad debt for the Venus platform, and coupled with the temporary panic and bank run, the impact could be devastating for Venus. But the greater impact is that this incident has brought back horrific memories of Venus's habitual attacks. The XVS price manipulation incident and its use as a tool for money laundering via BNB's cross-chain bridge are all examples of damage caused by fundamental flaws in Venus's security engineering. As the largest lending protocol on BSC, this is unacceptable. Note: The above is based on reasonable speculation based on the currently disclosed information. The details will be determined based on actual disclosed details.Let’s further consider the logical possibilities of Venus Protocol being attacked: 1) Security experts say that some big investors were phished. Conventional wisdom suggests that they could just withdraw funds directly with the private key. How could there be a flash loan? Most likely, the hacker obtained updateDelegate authorization through social engineering, gaining access to the account of a large investor, but without immediate liquidity to withdraw. In layman's terms, the hacker obtained the authority, but the large investor only had collateral, not the borrowed funds. The hacker had to find a way to obtain the collateral of the large investor. 2) Is it that the individual phishing incidents involving the major investor have nothing to do with the Venus contract? As mentioned earlier, if the hacker discovered that the major investor's account had no liquidity, their efforts would normally be in vain. But why was it possible to withdraw collateral through a simple flash loan attack? The answer lies in the Venus contract mechanism. The hacker may have used flash loans and a series of vToken cross-platform exchange rate differences to help the major investor repay the collateral and even withdraw some extra. Simply put, it is true that the collateral of the big investors was stolen, but it is very likely that it will become a bad debt of the Venus contract platform, unless the big investors are stupid enough to pay back the platform. 3) While other users' funds are temporarily safe, the Venus platform faces significant liability concerns. While the attack was triggered by a large investor being phished by a social engineering scheme, the platform ultimately profited. The $30 million stolen is likely to become bad debt for the Venus platform, and coupled with the temporary panic and bank run, the impact could be devastating for Venus. But the greater impact is that this incident has brought back horrific memories of Venus's habitual attacks. The XVS price manipulation incident and its use as a tool for money laundering via BNB's cross-chain bridge are all examples of damage caused by fundamental flaws in Venus's security engineering. As the largest lending protocol on BSC, this is unacceptable. Note: The above is based on reasonable speculation based on the currently disclosed information. The details will be determined based on actual disclosed details.

Why is it always stolen? On the systemic flaws in Venus contract design

2025/09/03 13:00

Let’s further consider the logical possibilities of Venus Protocol being attacked:

1) Security experts say that some big investors were phished. Conventional wisdom suggests that they could just withdraw funds directly with the private key. How could there be a flash loan?

Most likely, the hacker obtained updateDelegate authorization through social engineering, gaining access to the account of a large investor, but without immediate liquidity to withdraw. In layman's terms, the hacker obtained the authority, but the large investor only had collateral, not the borrowed funds. The hacker had to find a way to obtain the collateral of the large investor.

2) Is it that the individual phishing incidents involving the major investor have nothing to do with the Venus contract? As mentioned earlier, if the hacker discovered that the major investor's account had no liquidity, their efforts would normally be in vain. But why was it possible to withdraw collateral through a simple flash loan attack? The answer lies in the Venus contract mechanism. The hacker may have used flash loans and a series of vToken cross-platform exchange rate differences to help the major investor repay the collateral and even withdraw some extra.

Simply put, it is true that the collateral of the big investors was stolen, but it is very likely that it will become a bad debt of the Venus contract platform, unless the big investors are stupid enough to pay back the platform.

3) While other users' funds are temporarily safe, the Venus platform faces significant liability concerns. While the attack was triggered by a large investor being phished by a social engineering scheme, the platform ultimately profited. The $30 million stolen is likely to become bad debt for the Venus platform, and coupled with the temporary panic and bank run, the impact could be devastating for Venus.

But the greater impact is that this incident has brought back horrific memories of Venus's habitual attacks. The XVS price manipulation incident and its use as a tool for money laundering via BNB's cross-chain bridge are all examples of damage caused by fundamental flaws in Venus's security engineering. As the largest lending protocol on BSC, this is unacceptable. Note: The above is based on reasonable speculation based on the currently disclosed information. The details will be determined based on actual disclosed details.

Market Opportunity
Binance Coin Logo
Binance Coin Price(BNB)
$842.19
$842.19$842.19
-0.20%
USD
Binance Coin (BNB) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

JPMorgan Chase Warns Fed Rate Cuts Could Be ‘Ultimately Negative’ for Stocks, Bonds and US Dollar: Report

JPMorgan Chase Warns Fed Rate Cuts Could Be ‘Ultimately Negative’ for Stocks, Bonds and US Dollar: Report

A potential rate cut by the Federal Reserve this week could reportedly turn out to be a net negative for the US financial market if it comes about as a result of political pressure and influence, a Bloomberg report says. The report cites JPMorgan Asset Management’s chief global strategist, David Kelly, saying that a rate […] The post JPMorgan Chase Warns Fed Rate Cuts Could Be ‘Ultimately Negative’ for Stocks, Bonds and US Dollar: Report appeared first on The Daily Hodl.
Share
The Daily Hodl2025/09/18 04:00
Academic Publishing and Fairness: A Game-Theoretic Model of Peer-Review Bias

Academic Publishing and Fairness: A Game-Theoretic Model of Peer-Review Bias

Exploring how biases in the peer-review system impact researchers' choices, showing how principles of fairness relate to the production of scientific knowledge based on topic importance and hardness.
Share
Hackernoon2025/09/17 23:15
Adoption Leads Traders to Snorter Token

Adoption Leads Traders to Snorter Token

The post Adoption Leads Traders to Snorter Token appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Largest Bank in Spain Launches Crypto Service: Adoption Leads Traders to Snorter Token Sign Up for Our Newsletter! For updates and exclusive offers enter your email. Leah is a British journalist with a BA in Journalism, Media, and Communications and nearly a decade of content writing experience. Over the last four years, her focus has primarily been on Web3 technologies, driven by her genuine enthusiasm for decentralization and the latest technological advancements. She has contributed to leading crypto and NFT publications – Cointelegraph, Coinbound, Crypto News, NFT Plazas, Bitcolumnist, Techreport, and NFT Lately – which has elevated her to a senior role in crypto journalism. Whether crafting breaking news or in-depth reviews, she strives to engage her readers with the latest insights and information. Her articles often span the hottest cryptos, exchanges, and evolving regulations. As part of her ploy to attract crypto newbies into Web3, she explains even the most complex topics in an easily understandable and engaging way. Further underscoring her dynamic journalism background, she has written for various sectors, including software testing (TEST Magazine), travel (Travel Off Path), and music (Mixmag). When she’s not deep into a crypto rabbit hole, she’s probably island-hopping (with the Galapagos and Hainan being her go-to’s). Or perhaps sketching chalk pencil drawings while listening to the Pixies, her all-time favorite band. This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy Center or Cookie Policy. I Agree Source: https://bitcoinist.com/banco-santander-and-snorter-token-crypto-services/
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/17 23:45