The names “spread” after the Nomad was attacked

 218 total views


2022-08-03 07:34:48

Early this morning (August 2), the hottest news in the DeFi community was definitely the Nomad attack. Although many other bridges have also been visited by hackers, this time Nomad’s incident is “a little bit” different when it affects a few related names. Then let’s take a look at these names!

The names “spread” after the Nomad was attacked

Case overview

As CHK reported this morning, Nomad was attacked because of a vulnerability in Root Message authentication. The details and developments of the incident are summarized in the article below!

> See more: The Nomad cross-chain bridge was hacked and “fouled”, with more than $176 million in damage

This is not the first time that the argument errors in the contract of cross-chain bridges have been exploited, but this incident has a great impact, making me think of the Poly Network incident more than a year ago.

Most of the effects of cross-chain attacks are isolated within the scope of the project. However, since many partners use Nomad assets (on different chains), it is inevitable that many names will be affected after this incident.

Update:

Peckshield also posted a list of wallets involved in the attack, including white hat hacker wallets who actively hacked to get money back to Nomad users.

“There are about 41 addresses that have withdrawn 152 million USD (~80% of the loss in the Nomad case). This includes 7 MEV bots ($7.1 million), wallet that hacked Rari Capital (Arbitrum) (~$3.4 million) and 6 white hat hackers ($8.2 million). 10% of these addresses have ENS domains and withdraw $6.1 million.”

Moonbeam

Moonbeam’s Twitter homepage said that the attack on the Nomad bridge caused the amount of assets at the Ethereum bridge to be wiped out. The team also said that it is in the process of reviewing whether any vulnerabilities exist in the source code of Moonbeam.

Also this morning, Moonbeam had to “suspend” the blockchain for 4 hours to conduct the “Maintenance” process. During this period, users cannot make money transfers or interact with smart contracts. However, at the time of writing, the maintenance process has been completed and the Moonbeam team said that no vulnerabilities related to the above attack have been discovered.

Accordingly, Nomad is one of the main bridge platforms on Moonbeam’s ecosystem, and the theft of most of the security assets at the Ethereum bridgehead may affect the value of some assets at the bridgehead. Moonbeam.

Connext

Connext is a team that has a close relationship with Nomad. Many sources believe that Connext derives its liquidity from Nomad and may suffer great losses after this incident. However, Arjun (project representative) said that Connext only stores madUSDC assets (ie USDC certificates on the Nomad bridge).

“We have been notified of an attack on the Ethereum contract. Connext users are not directly affected by this incident, but madAsset (certificates of assets) held by users on Moonbeam, Milkomeda, and Evmos may not be fully backed by assets on Ethereum. “

Connext also said that the team has contacted the partner bridges to suspend the rotation of madAsset assets to avoid losses.

Evmos

Evmos is the most rare case, when the price of EVMOS coin skyrocketed after the Nomad attack.

The reason for this fluctuation is that madUSDC lost its price anchor at the Ethereum bridgehead, causing many people to seek to sell this asset to EVMOS to avoid loss of asset value. However, the lack of liquidity and a large number of users landed, causing the price of EVMOS to quickly build up a column.

However, this move quickly cooled down after that as users sought to move assets to other chains.

The Evmos team said that this vulnerability is not related to the network and the Evmos chain is still working normally.

Ending

So up to the time of writing, there have been no more names announced affected by Nomad. As I mentioned above, this case does not arise because of the nature of the “cross-chain” but it is a problem arising from the security error of the contract – which can happen with any array of DeFi products. .

However, again and again, the danger of these products is that once attacked, it can quickly spread to neighboring chains, as well as related products.

The latest updates on this incident will be quickly sent to readers by CHK!

Synthetic CHK

Maybe you are interested:

Maybe you are interested:



#names #spread #Nomad #attacked

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami