BTC $64,120.79 -0.13%
ETH $1,864.12 +0.25%
BNB $566.82 +1.21%
XRP $1.09 -0.22%
SOL $74.00 -0.48%
TRX $0.3296 -0.17%
DOGE $0.0699 +1.64%
ADA $0.1636 -0.68%
BCH $210.74 +0.76%
LINK $8.36 +0.35%
HYPE $57.60 -1.19%
AAVE $90.93 -3.37%
SUI $0.7073 -1.97%
XLM $0.1782 -1.31%
ZEC $477.82 -4.30%
BTC $64,120.79 -0.13%
ETH $1,864.12 +0.25%
BNB $566.82 +1.21%
XRP $1.09 -0.22%
SOL $74.00 -0.48%
TRX $0.3296 -0.17%
DOGE $0.0699 +1.64%
ADA $0.1636 -0.68%
BCH $210.74 +0.76%
LINK $8.36 +0.35%
HYPE $57.60 -1.19%
AAVE $90.93 -3.37%
SUI $0.7073 -1.97%
XLM $0.1782 -1.31%
ZEC $477.82 -4.30%

ultimate

All
Article
Flash

Analysis: The ZetaChain vulnerability was reported in advance by white hats but was ignored, ultimately leading to a $334,000 attack incident

According to Cointelegraph, the cross-chain protocol ZetaChain disclosed that the security issues involved in its recent approximately $334,000 vulnerability attack event had been reported in advance by researchers in the bug bounty program but were deemed "expected behavior" by the project team at that time and were not addressed.According to the official incident review, this attack originated from a combination of three design flaws that initially appeared to be independent and low-risk: the Gateway contract allowed anyone to send any cross-chain instructions; the receiving end could execute calls on almost any contract, and the blacklist restrictions were too narrow; some wallets retained unlimited approvals for a long time without being cleared. The attacker ultimately combined these flaws to instruct the Gateway to transfer tokens directly to their controlled address, thus completing the asset transfer.ZetaChain stated that this attack involved 9 transactions across four chains: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, and BSC, with the stolen funds all coming from wallets controlled by ZetaChain, and user funds were not affected. The official noted that the attack showed clear premeditation. The attacker funded the wallet through Tornado Cash three days before the attack and deployed a dedicated Drainer contract in advance, while also implementing an Address Poisoning attack.Currently, ZetaChain has begun pushing repair patches to the mainnet nodes, permanently disabling the arbitrary call function and changing the unlimited approval mechanism in the deposit process to "exact amount authorization."

CZ's new book reveals: During the 9·4 period, the silence of venture capital left him disappointed, and Sequoia ultimately backed out due to a breakdown in valuation talks

Binance founder Zhao Changpeng (CZ) recalled in his new book that after the "9·4" regulatory policy was introduced in 2017, venture capital firms as a whole became more cautious, and Sequoia Capital, which had originally expressed investment intentions, also paused related cooperation. He stated, "Seeing the venture capitalists collectively silent during our most difficult September, I was actually quite disappointed."CZ revealed that prior to this, Sequoia had expressed investment interest at the beginning of He Yi's joining, but chose to wait and see in light of the policy impact. Subsequently, Binance achieved rapid growth from September to October, with the number of users increasing from about 20,000 in August to about 120,000 by late October, ranking among the top ten exchanges globally and becoming profitable.CZ stated that by the end of October, after the risk phase had basically passed, Sequoia re-expressed its investment intentions, but they had proposed to raise the valuation requirement. Ultimately, the two sides could not reach an agreement due to valuation differences. The other party then proposed to pursue legal proceedings, and a week later, four large boxes of legal documents were delivered. CZ said this was the "first time in his life becoming a defendant." CZ mentioned that he later learned that the lawsuit was led by Sequoia's legal team in the U.S., who are skilled at using the media to create public opinion, "the media reporters knew before I, the party involved."

Gate CBO Kevin Lee: Oil prices move first, inflation follows, and the central bank's path is the ultimate variable

Gate CBO Kevin Lee recently published an article titled "War, War Never Changes... How Will the Macro Market Move?" regarding the recent situation in the Middle East. He pointed out that geopolitical conflicts themselves do not alter the fundamental operating logic of the market; what truly determines the medium-term direction of assets is the impact of the prolonged conflict on the inflation path and changes in central bank policy orientation.Kevin stated that within hours to days after the outbreak of conflict, crude oil typically experiences significant volatility first, as the market prices in the tail risk of supply disruptions; gold then activates, serving both as a safe haven and an inflation hedge; the stock market faces short-term pressure, with VIX rising rapidly and significant sector divergence.As the situation progresses from several days to two weeks, if energy supply is not continuously damaged, oil prices and risk premiums often retrace, and stocks and crypto assets rebound with the recovery of risk sentiment; however, if high oil prices persist for an extended period, inflation expectations will be systematically elevated, shifting the asset pricing logic from a trading perspective to a macro perspective.The article further emphasizes that what truly changes the trend is not the market reaction on the day of the conflict but the inflation data and policy expectations that gradually emerge weeks later. Over a longer cycle, the market will reprice around the evolution path of inflation, the credibility of monetary policy, and the economic growth outlook. Historical experience repeatedly proves that in high-uncertainty environments, emotional decision-making often comes at a high cost; understanding the transmission sequence and respecting cyclical patterns are key to navigating volatility.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.