Scan to download
BTC $77,824.96 +0.11%
ETH $2,321.37 +0.25%
BNB $638.03 +0.45%
XRP $1.44 +0.57%
SOL $86.64 +1.37%
TRX $0.3220 -1.88%
DOGE $0.0985 +1.21%
ADA $0.2535 +1.54%
BCH $455.17 -0.11%
LINK $9.43 +1.52%
HYPE $41.66 +2.16%
AAVE $95.87 +2.48%
SUI $0.9531 +1.02%
XLM $0.1734 -0.88%
ZEC $357.11 +2.96%
BTC $77,824.96 +0.11%
ETH $2,321.37 +0.25%
BNB $638.03 +0.45%
XRP $1.44 +0.57%
SOL $86.64 +1.37%
TRX $0.3220 -1.88%
DOGE $0.0985 +1.21%
ADA $0.2535 +1.54%
BCH $455.17 -0.11%
LINK $9.43 +1.52%
HYPE $41.66 +2.16%
AAVE $95.87 +2.48%
SUI $0.9531 +1.02%
XLM $0.1734 -0.88%
ZEC $357.11 +2.96%

mit

Monad Co-founders: If a rate limit is set on collateral supply, today's rsETH event could prevent a loss of about 200 million dollars

Keone Hon from Monad Lianchuang stated: "I feel that the lending protocol for the liquidity pool should set rate limits on the supply of assets deposited as collateral. For example, if the current supply is 100 million and the supply cap is 300 million, then in the next 10 minutes, the maximum allowed increase should be to 110 million, rather than allowing a one-time deposit of the full 200 million. In reality, no one needs to complete such a large deposit all at once.This is important because when certain exotic assets are attacked, the impact depends on the scale of the exit channels for that asset. Especially in many cases where attacks belong to infinite issuance vulnerabilities, the scale of the exit that can be made essentially determines the upper limit of the attack losses. Lending protocols are often the largest exit channels. If a smart cap is introduced, where the initial cap is slightly above the current supply and is gradually adjusted to the real cap over several hours, it would have a huge effect. With such a mechanism, rsETH depositors could have avoided about 200 million dollars in losses.This also raises a point: the asset issuers themselves should support such mechanisms. If you are issuing redeemable tokens with redemption delays, you are not worried about hackers redeeming directly from you, but you need to compress the scale of external exit paths as much as possible without affecting normal users. Therefore, a high supply cap should be seen as a risk rather than a symbol of strength. For example, the Hyperbridge DOT attack did not result in a 100 million dollar loss because there were very few exit paths; the Resolv attack loss was 24 million dollars instead of 200 million dollars because the scale of the exit path limited the loss cap. This is an obvious principle, but there are still immediately actionable measures: audit the supply caps of all assets and lower the caps when unnecessary."

BitMEX Research proposes a new mechanism to mitigate the impact of quantum computing-related Bitcoin freezing

According to official news, BitMEX Research has released a new research article proposing that in response to the risk of future quantum computers potentially breaking elliptic curve signatures, the Bitcoin network could adopt an alternative soft fork mechanism to "directly freeze" to reduce controversy and increase flexibility.The proposal revolves around "quantum-vulnerable fund freezing," but suggests avoiding the direct freezing of all related assets without evidence, instead gradually implementing security strategies through a verifiable condition-triggering mechanism. The core of the proposal is to establish a "signal vault," which contains special addresses generated using "accidental numbers" to prove that no one possesses their private keys. If passive spending occurs from that address, it will be regarded as on-chain evidence that quantum computing capabilities genuinely exist, thereby immediately triggering a comprehensive freeze of quantum-vulnerable assets.At the same time, the fund could attract capital through a multi-signature structure as a "quantum bounty," aimed at incentivizing potential attackers to expose their capabilities. The article also mentions that there is currently a BIP-361 proposal promoting the phased disabling of the old signature system and ultimately freezing risky assets, but this proposal is controversial due to its involvement in "mandatory freezing."The newly proposed "signal-trigger + security window" mechanism aims to replace the fixed-time freeze path, reducing potential system shocks while retaining Bitcoin's censorship-resistant characteristics, but it also brings complexity and execution risk trade-off issues.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.