Scan to download
BTC $76,786.00 -1.64%
ETH $2,274.37 -3.07%
BNB $621.35 -1.75%
XRP $1.39 -2.91%
SOL $84.09 -2.83%
TRX $0.3249 +0.40%
DOGE $0.0971 -1.85%
ADA $0.2444 -3.20%
BCH $450.98 -0.24%
LINK $9.18 -3.17%
HYPE $41.76 +0.97%
AAVE $97.21 +1.58%
SUI $0.9204 -2.65%
XLM $0.1650 -3.53%
ZEC $352.26 -0.63%
BTC $76,786.00 -1.64%
ETH $2,274.37 -3.07%
BNB $621.35 -1.75%
XRP $1.39 -2.91%
SOL $84.09 -2.83%
TRX $0.3249 +0.40%
DOGE $0.0971 -1.85%
ADA $0.2444 -3.20%
BCH $450.98 -0.24%
LINK $9.18 -3.17%
HYPE $41.76 +0.97%
AAVE $97.21 +1.58%
SUI $0.9204 -2.65%
XLM $0.1650 -3.53%
ZEC $352.26 -0.63%

esp

Bitcoin Quantum Security Crisis: 6.9 million BTC exposed to risk, governance challenges hinder response progress

According to CoinDesk, while quantum computers cannot disrupt the Bitcoin mining mechanism or the blockchain ledger, they may potentially crack the elliptic curve encryption system that protects wallet ownership through Shor's algorithm. Currently, about 6.9 million BTC (approximately one-third of the total supply) face potential risks due to public keys being visible on-chain, including around 1 million early holdings by Satoshi Nakamoto; transactions generated after the Taproot upgrade in 2021 are also affected due to public key exposure.Ethereum has established a formal quantum resistance migration plan since 2018, with 4 full-time teams and over 10 independent development groups, and has launched a dedicated progress website at pq.ethereum.org. In contrast, Bitcoin currently lacks a unified response roadmap, and the existing BIP-360 proposal and BitMEX Research detection scheme have not received widespread support from core developers. Notable Bitcoin advocate Nic Carter pointed out that Bitcoin's response is "the worst," while Blockstream CEO Adam Back believes that current quantum systems are still in the laboratory stage, but he also agrees that optional upgrade solutions should be deployed in advance.Analysts point out that Bitcoin's anti-centralization governance culture makes coordinating large-scale security upgrades extremely difficult, and how to handle historical legacy issues such as Satoshi Nakamoto's holdings is particularly challenging. A related paper from Google warns that once quantum attacks become a reality, the window for response may have already closed.

Coinbase upgrades its anti-fraud system, integrating machine learning with a rules engine, reducing response time to a few hours

Coinbase stated that it is optimizing the rule creation process in its anti-fraud system by integrating machine learning models with a rules engine, achieving more efficient risk management. It also proposed a dual-track strategy of "models responsible for long-term defense, rules responsible for rapid response," and built a unified framework to create a feedback loop between the two: rules are used to capture new types of fraud and train the model in reverse, thereby continuously enhancing overall defense capabilities.In terms of specific optimizations, Coinbase has transformed the previously manual rule creation process into a data-driven and automated recommendation system by restructuring data, automating schema evolution, and introducing notebook-based analytical tools, significantly improving efficiency. Among these improvements, the performance of rule backtesting has increased by more than 10 times, and the overall response time has been reduced from several days to a few hours. Additionally, the new system uses machine learning to recommend parameters, helping to reduce false positive rates while combating fraud and minimizing the impact on normal users. Coinbase indicated that the next step will be to advance event-driven automatic rule generation and explore the "one-click conversion" of efficient rules into model features, further moving towards an automated risk management system.

Three Possible Responses to the rsETH Hacker Incident: Balancing Bad Debt and Reputation, Testing KelpDAO's Credibility and Aave's Risk Tolerance

DefiLlama founder 0xngmi has outlined three possible courses of action that KelpDAO may take following the rsETH hacking incident. Each of the three paths has significant flaws, and the final decision will test KelpDAO's credibility and Aave's risk tolerance.Path One: All users share the losses. KelpDAO will uniformly deduct 18.5% of the losses from all rsETH holders proportionally. Currently, there are about 666,000 rsETH collateralized across the Aave network, primarily highly leveraged on the mainnet and L2 (assuming all are at a 95% liquidation LTV). Once socialized losses occur, the equity of all positions on the mainnet will be completely wiped out, resulting in approximately $216 million in bad debt. The Umbrella protocol can cover $55 million in bad debt, and the Aave treasury will additionally bear $85 million, leaving a gap of about $76 million. KelpDAO may fill this gap by borrowing or selling Aave tokens (currently valued at about $51 million), but this would still put significant pressure on Aave, and all users would need to share the losses.Path Two: Directly rug the rsETH holders on L2. KelpDAO will only guarantee the mainnet rsETH and consider the rsETH on L2 as worthless. Currently, Aave L2 has about $359 million in rsETH collateral (calculated at current oracle prices), and if all are calculated at maximum leverage, it would result in approximately $341 million in bad debt, which cannot be covered by the Umbrella protocol at all. Aave can only use the treasury or borrowing to save part of the market, most likely abandoning chains like Arbitrum, Mantle, and Base, which have the largest losses, leading to a collapse of these L2 markets. This option has a minor impact on the Aave mainnet but would severely damage the credibility of the L2 ecosystem and could trigger a chain reaction.Path Three: Attempt to refund only the holders based on a snapshot taken before the hack, which is extremely difficult to execute. KelpDAO tries to fully refund only the rsETH holders based on the snapshot taken before the hack, while subsequent buyers or transfer holders would bear the losses themselves. However, since funds have significantly flowed after the attack, and the nature of DeFi protocols is liquidity pools, it is impossible to truly distinguish between different batches of depositors, making technical execution very challenging. The hacker borrowed $124 million on the Aave mainnet and $18 million on Arbitrum, and after deducting the coverage from the Umbrella protocol, there remains about $91 million in losses. Although this plan theoretically minimizes the spread of impact, its practical implementation is nearly impossible and could easily lead to legal and community disputes.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.