πŸ€‘πŸ’Έ Hack-Gate: Who’s to Blame? πŸ€”

The Plot Thickens: πŸ•΅οΈβ€β™‚οΈ

  • Bybit, the cryptocurrency exchange with a penchant for drama, has released a forensic review that’s about as damning as a sternly worded letter. It claims their systems were as secure as a Swiss bank vault, and the whole shebang was the fault of Safe wallet’s breach. πŸ™„
  • Safe, on the other hand, is having none of it. They claim their smart contracts and source code were as clean as a whistle, and those external security researchers didn’t find any vulnerabilities. πŸ™…β€β™‚οΈ
  • Meanwhile, the laundered funds have been scattered across hundreds of wallets, some of which are tainted from previous hacks. It’s like a bad game of cryptocurrency hopscotch! πŸ€Ήβ€β™€οΈ

Cryptocurrency exchange Bybit has published a forensic review of last week’s $1.5 billion hack, and it’s a real page-turner. Apparently, their systems were as secure as Fort Knox, and the whole debacle was caused by Safe wallet’s compromised infrastructure. πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

Bybit’s review concluded that a Safe developer’s credentials were compromised, allowing the nefarious Lazarus hacking group to gain unauthorized access to the Safe wallet. And then, of course, they deceived Bybit staff into signing the malicious transaction. Sneaky devils! 😈

However, a person familiar with the matter (wink, wink) told CoinDesk that despite the wallet’s infrastructure being compromised by social engineering, the hack wouldn’t have been possible if Bybit hadn’t “blind signed” the transaction. Ah, the old “blind signing” trick! πŸ™ˆ

Safe, not one to take things lying down, issued a statement saying their smart contracts were unaffected, and the whole thing was caused by a compromised developer machine. They also pointed out that external security researchers didn’t find any vulnerabilities in their code. πŸ™…β€β™‚οΈ

The back-and-forth between these two companies is like a game of cryptocurrency tennis. It’s a bit like the WazirX and Liminal Custody debacle last July, where they blamed each other for a $230 million exploit. 🎾

Read More

2025-02-27 02:55