After amassing $120 million in tokens through an infinite-minting glitch, hackers reportedly only cashed out around $1 million due to a lack of liquidity on BonqDAO.
According to blockchain security firm CertiK, the damage caused by the blockchain technical agreement BonqDAO on February 1st was much less than initially thought.
According to CertiK, cyber attacks were the first to borrow 100m Beur, a smooth bond linked to Europe because of a lack of control over the pledge ratio and less than $1000 in collateral. If the user sets the basic parameter to zero, the service platform defaults to the "maximum value of uint256", which in turn allows for the distribution of large digital loans.
However, CertiK shows that although the cyber attack borrowed 100 million Beur (about $120 million at the time of the attack), cyber hackers successfully withdrew only about $1 million due to the lack of liquidity of the service platform. Previously, blockchain security companies such as PeckSheild said they had lost about $120 million in injuries.
Bonq is a branch of the Liquity agreement, similar to blockchain technology, which uses treasure to describe independent debt trading positions. However, it is reported that Bonq has implemented the role of community settlement, and 45 treasures with Beur leverage ratio have been settled as a result of this event. According to CertiK, the attack also seriously affected the treasure trove of ALBT dynamic passwords, including about 110 million AllianceBlock. However, in this case, not a single Alliance Block intelligence contract was violated, and the project stated that it would airdrop supplies with a new dynamic password to compensate the affected holders.
While the lack of liquidity seems to have mitigated the adverse impact on BonqDAO during the event period, others are not so lucky. On Oct. 12, the diversified financing agreement Mango Markets initially lost $116 million after the cyber hacker Avraham Eisenberg manipulated the price of Mngo, pushing it 30 times higher in the short term under high permanent futures contracts. This is also possible because of the relatively low liquidity, the manipulation of Mngo must be relatively small original assets.
Related to:How does low liquidity cause damage to the Qingmang sales market of more than 116 million US dollars
Eisenberg then used his $423 million exaggerated stake in Mngo as collateral to win a $116 million loan and embezzled assets from the site. On December 28th Eisenberg was arrested in Puerto Rico for commodity spot manipulation and commodity fraud.