Hacker Attack Halves Flow, Rollback Plan Sparks Civil War in Ecosystem

marsbitPublished on 2025-12-29Last updated on 2025-12-29

Abstract

Flow, a Layer 1 blockchain built by Dapper Labs, suffered a major security breach last Saturday when a hacker exploited an execution layer vulnerability, transferring approximately $3.9 million in assets off-chain. The attack caused the price of FLOW to plummet by over 50%, dropping from $0.173 to $0.079, though it later partially recovered to around $0.107. Initially, the Flow Foundation proposed rolling back the network to a checkpoint before the attack occurred, which would have erased all transactions within a six-hour window. This decision was met with strong opposition from ecosystem partners, especially cross-chain bridges like deBridge and LayerZero, who warned that a rollback could cause asset duplication, inconsistencies, and significant losses for legitimate users. Facing community backlash and partner concerns, the foundation abandoned the rollback plan. Instead, it adopted an "Isolation Recovery Plan" developed in coordination with key partners. The new strategy involves no chain reorganization, preserves all legitimate user transactions, and temporarily restricts accounts that received illicitly minted tokens. The network will be restored in multiple stages, with full functionality expected within 24 to 48 hours. The incident has raised questions about network reliability and governance, shifting the crisis from a technical issue to a broader challenge of trust in Flow's decentralized integrity.

Author | Asher(@Asher_ 0210)

Last Saturday afternoon, a sudden hacker attack threw the Flow network into chaos. This Layer 1 network, built by the Dapper Labs team and tailored for the next generation of applications, games, and digital assets, watched helplessly as assets worth $3.9 million were transferred off-chain by exploiting an execution layer vulnerability. Following the attack, its token FLOW was halved in a short time, plummeting from $0.173 to $0.079, and has since rebounded slightly to around $0.107.

FLOW K-Line Chart

Below, Odaily Planet Daily breaks down this Flow theft incident, the official response, and why it has drawn strong skepticism from Flow's partners and community.

Flow Official Emergency Response: Isolate Network and Announce Rollback Plan

After the attack, the Flow Foundation quickly responded and confirmed the details of the incident. The attacker exploited an execution layer vulnerability to transfer approximately $3.9 million in assets; the incident did not affect users' existing balances, and user deposits remain safe. The relevant attack addresses have been marked, and money laundering paths are being continuously tracked. The Foundation has submitted asset freeze requests to Circle, Tether, and several major exchanges.

To clean up illegal on-chain transactions and fix the vulnerability, the Flow Foundation isolated the network and released a patched version of the mainnet, Mainnet 28. The Foundation's initial proposed solution was to roll back the network state to a checkpoint before the attack, specifically to Cadence block height 137363395, thereby deleting all transaction records generated within approximately 6 hours. All transactions, whether legitimate or not, would be erased together, and users would need to resubmit transactions after node restarts. The Foundation believed this plan was the safest path to restore network integrity, repeatedly emphasized that user funds would not be affected throughout the process, and promised to provide external updates on the incident's progress every two hours.

This rollback decision, seemingly decisive, quickly ignited an ecological firestorm—because the hacker's funds had already been bridged off-chain, the rollback would not affect the attacker but would only impact honest users and partners.

Cross-Chain Bridge Partners, Community Users Strongly Oppose, Rollback Plan Heavily Criticized

After the rollback plan was announced, cross-chain bridge partners within the Flow ecosystem and community users quickly faced collective skepticism. Alex Smirnov, co-founder of deBridge, a major cross-chain bridge partner of Flow, publicly criticized the decision on platform X as too hasty and made without any communication with key bridge partners beforehand. As a crucial asset channel for the Flow ecosystem, deBridge did not receive any advance notice regarding the rollback.

Smirnov pointed out that the potential damage from a rollback could far exceed that of the initial hacker attack itself. Since cross-chain assets are already circulated across multiple systems, a forced rollback would cause serious issues such as asset duplication and inconsistent custody states, ultimately harming the bridges, users, and counterparties who operated normally during the window. He disclosed that approximately $200,000 and $50,000 in deposits on deBridge fell within the rollback time window; once the rollback is executed, it could lead to funds disappearing on one side or the extreme scenario of assets being minted repeatedly.

Based on these risks, Smirnov called on Flow validators to suspend block production and validation until compensation plans, partner coordination mechanisms, and independent security team intervention plans are all clarified. Similar issues are not isolated cases. As the main cross-chain custodian for USDC on the Flow network, LayerZero also faces risks with approximately $220,000 and $180,000 in cross-chain transactions falling within the rollback window.

Beyond cross-chain bridge partners within the Flow ecosystem, users on platform X began to集中 express concerns about fund safety, developers questioned the network's reliability and governance mechanisms in extreme situations, investor sentiment turned cautious, and selling pressure intensified accordingly. Many voices pointed out that the rollback itself exposed the reality of centralized control on the chain, rapidly turning a technical accident into a crisis of trust.

Some community views further targeted the core principles of blockchain. Some argued that the rollback directly shook transaction finality and immutability, making Flow resemble an alliance chain subject to administrative intervention at critical moments. Others compared it to historical security incidents on other public chains, noting that similar situations are usually handled by isolating attacker addresses and freezing fund flows, rather than performing a global rollback of the entire network state.

Crypto KOL Wazz(@WazzCrypto) stated bluntly on platform X that Flow's rollback decision was one of the worst handling methods he had ever seen. In his view, the attacker had already transferred nearly $4 million in assets off-chain and would hardly be substantively affected by the rollback; the real cost would be borne by innocent users who used the network normally via cross-chain bridges.

Flow Official Changes Stance: Abandons Rollback, Adopts Isolated Recovery New Plan

Facing strong opposition from partners and the community, the Flow official ultimately decided to abandon the network rollback and shift to an "Isolated Recovery Plan." This plan was developed through direct consultation with cross-chain bridges, exchanges, and infrastructure partners. Key points include:

  • No rollback/reorganization, preserving all legitimate user activity;
  • No need for partners to replay transactions;
  • Over 99.9% of accounts unaffected, normal operation upon restart;
  • Temporary restriction of accounts receiving illegally minted tokens upon restart;

Additionally, the network will be restored in phases:

  • Phase 1: Cadence environment goes online, EVM temporarily restricted;
  • Phase 2: Cadence repair (approximately 24 to 48 hours);
  • Phase 3: EVM repair and restart;
  • Phase 4: Cross-chain bridges/exchanges resume operation, specific recovery time determined by operators based on actual conditions after confirming stability.

Furthermore, Dapper Labs, the team behind Flow, expressed support for this plan on platform X, stating it "preserves legitimate activity and provides a clear path to recovery."

This "abandon rollback" stance alleviated ecological tensions in the short term and avoided the systemic risk扩散 that a rollback might have triggered. As of now, the network is still in the phased coordination and recovery process, and officials state that user funds remain safe.

In the highly uncertain environment of the crypto market, this crisis may become a significant watershed in Flow's development path. Its long-term impact remains to be tested by time.

Related Questions

QWhat was the initial response from the Flow Foundation to the hack, and what plan did they propose?

AThe Flow Foundation quickly responded by isolating the network and proposing to roll back the network state to the checkpoint before the attack (Cadence block height 137363395), which would erase all transactions from the approximately 6-hour window.

QWhy did the cross-chain bridge partners and community strongly oppose the rollback plan?

AThey opposed it because the rollback would not affect the hacker, who had already bridged the funds off-chain, but would instead harm honest users and partners by causing issues like double-spending, asset duplication, and inconsistencies in cross-chain asset custody.

QWhat was the alternative solution Flow adopted after abandoning the rollback plan?

AFlow adopted an 'Isolation Recovery Plan' that involved no rollback, preserving all legitimate user activity, temporarily restricting accounts that received illegally minted tokens, and restarting the network in phases with coordination from bridges and exchanges.

QHow did the hack impact the price of the FLOW token?

AThe FLOW token price was halved, dropping from $0.173 to $0.079 shortly after the hack, though it later saw a small rebound to around $0.107.

QWhat major risk did deBridge highlight regarding the rollback window?

AdeBridge highlighted that about $200,000 in ETH and $50,000 in USDC on their bridge fell within the rollback window, and executing the rollback could cause those funds to vanish or be duplicated, leading to severe inconsistencies.

Related Reads

SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic: The Three AI Giants Racing for IPO, Which One Is Worth Betting On?

SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic are poised for historic IPOs within weeks, potentially raising a combined $180 billion—a sum exceeding the entire internet bubble's fundraising. The hosts of the Limitless Podcast argue this isn't just individual company financing but an unprecedented capital concentration for AI infrastructure, driven by an insatiable need for compute, data centers, power, and chips. SpaceX's IPO is notable for reportedly changing market index rules to allow faster inclusion, potentially funneling trillions in passive retirement funds into its stock, despite its unproven space-based data center business model. In contrast, Anthropic demonstrates explosive growth, with ARR reportedly hitting $45 billion and approaching profitability, fueled by strong enterprise adoption of products like Claude Code. Google's separate $80 billion raise highlights the immense capital pressure, even for giants. The discussion acknowledges bubble risks but leans optimistic. The hosts contend the massive spending is building essential physical infrastructure for the next technological era. A key bottleneck isn't capital but the real-world limits of chip manufacturing and construction speed. As long as demand for AI compute outstrips supply, this investment cycle represents a foundational build-out rather than a purely financial bubble. All three companies are seen as foundational bets on the future, with Anthropic often cited as the most immediately compelling due to its proven revenue trajectory.

marsbit1h ago

SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic: The Three AI Giants Racing for IPO, Which One Is Worth Betting On?

marsbit1h ago

From 'Old Guys' to 'New Favorites': How AI Is Revaluing Old Infrastructure from Dell to Nokia?

From "Vintage Tech" to "New AI Darlings": How AI Revalues Old Infrastructure One year ago, tech giants like Dell, Nokia, Cisco, and Western Data were seen as slow-growth, low-valuation stories, far from the AI spotlight dominated by players like Nvidia. Now, these legacy tech stocks are gaining market attention, sparking debate on whether this is genuine industry revaluation or a temporary narrative. As AI moves from model parameters to real-world data centers, the market is recognizing companies with proven delivery and infrastructure capabilities. This shift marks a change in the AI investment thesis: from pure model and GPU focus to the complex systems engineering required for deployment. Companies like Dell, HPE, and Corning are being revalued not for being "sexy" AI innovators, but for their decades of accumulated expertise in supply chains, enterprise delivery, and infrastructure—assets that have become critical in the AI buildout phase. The revaluation is unfolding across three key infrastructure lines: 1. **Servers & System Integration:** Dell and HPE are emerging as crucial system integrators or "general contractors" for AI data centers, translating GPU orders into complete, deployable server racks integrated with power, cooling, and networking. 2. **Networking & Connectivity:** AI's scale demands robust high-speed connections. Corning (fiber optics), Nokia (AI-RAN, 6G), and Cisco (data center switches) are gaining importance for enabling efficient data transfer within and between AI clusters. 3. **Storage:** Beyond high-speed memory (HBM/DRAM), the AI data explosion is driving demand for high-capacity hard drives (HDDs) from companies like Western Digital and Seagate to handle training data, logs, and cold storage cost-effectively. For this revaluation to be substantive and not just a narrative, three criteria are key: 1) Concrete AI-related order and revenue growth (e.g., Dell's AI server sales), 2) Upward revisions to company financial guidance, and 3) Sustainable improvements in profit quality, not just top-line revenue spikes. In essence, AI's transition to a real construction phase is re-pricing "old assets" against "new demand." The opportunity, however, is selective. Only those legacy firms that are demonstrably integrated into the capital expenditure chains of data center and enterprise AI deployment are likely to experience a true "logic re-rating" rather than just a temporary valuation bounce.

marsbit1h ago

From 'Old Guys' to 'New Favorites': How AI Is Revaluing Old Infrastructure from Dell to Nokia?

marsbit1h ago

The Merger of Codex and ChatGPT Marks the Beginning of a Major Reshuffle in Programming Tools

OpenAI is shifting its strategic focus from ChatGPT to Codex, merging them along with the browser tool Atlas into a unified desktop super-app. This move signals an internal belief that Codex, originally a programming tool, represents the next evolution of AI more than conversational models like ChatGPT. Over the past year, Codex's weekly active users have surged past 5 million. The key distinction is that while ChatGPT answers questions, Codex executes tasks. Enterprises increasingly value this ability to get work done over simply receiving advice. Consequently, Codex is attracting professionals beyond developers, including analysts, bankers, marketers, and product managers. OpenAI's reorganization and increased investment in Codex stem from recognizing that the future of AI competition lies in execution capabilities, not just conversation. The company is launching role-specific plugins (e.g., for data analysis, sales, design) to transform Codex into a broad knowledge work platform that automates and redefines white-collar workflows. Beyond being a tool, Codex reflects OpenAI's ambition to redefine software. New features like "Sites"—which generates interactive websites from documents—and collaborative "Annotations" aim to create a paradigm where the AI understands the goal and handles the tools and steps, functioning more like a digital colleague than traditional software. The ultimate goal is a unified experience where the user cares only about the completed task.

marsbit1h ago

The Merger of Codex and ChatGPT Marks the Beginning of a Major Reshuffle in Programming Tools

marsbit1h ago

Interpreting Investment Opportunities in the Age of Great Navigation, Invesco Great Wall Fund Releases '2026 Report on Chinese Enterprises Going Global'

Invesco Great Wall Fund has released its "2026 China Corporate Globalization Report," titled "The 'Great Navigation Era' of Chinese Enterprises." The report analyzes the new trends and investment opportunities as Chinese companies expand globally, moving from simple product exports to comprehensive overseas operations involving services, branding, and local production. Driven by factors like trade friction, the pursuit of higher profit margins abroad, and policy support, globalization is becoming essential for Chinese companies. The report outlines an evolution: from early product export ("Globalization 1.0") to the current "Globalization 2.0," characterized by overseas capacity, capital goods investment, consumer brand expansion, and service exports. Chinese firms' competitive advantages are highlighted, including a vast engineer talent pool, low-cost and robust infrastructure, and complete industrial clusters. Specific sectors with significant出海 potential are identified: * **Capital Goods** (e.g., engineering machinery, power equipment): Benefiting from global demand, especially in Belt & Road markets and the AI-driven power grid upgrade cycle. * **Consumer Brands**: Transitioning from cost to brand advantage, leveraging供应链 efficiency. * **Technology & Innovation**: Including AI applications, optical modules within global tech supply chains, and new energy vehicles focusing on local production. * **Pharmaceuticals**: Chinese biotech firms are becoming preferred partners for global pharma, with potential for breakthrough drugs in areas like oncology and weight loss. The report concludes that corporate globalization represents a sustained, core theme for China's capital markets, though companies must navigate challenges like geopolitics and localization.

marsbit2h ago

Interpreting Investment Opportunities in the Age of Great Navigation, Invesco Great Wall Fund Releases '2026 Report on Chinese Enterprises Going Global'

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

How to Buy FLOW

Welcome to HTX.com! We've made purchasing Flow (FLOW) simple and convenient. Follow our step-by-step guide to embark on your crypto journey.Step 1: Create Your HTX AccountUse your email or phone number to sign up for a free account on HTX. Experience a hassle-free registration journey and unlock all features.Get My AccountStep 2: Go to Buy Crypto and Choose Your Payment MethodCredit/Debit Card: Use your Visa or Mastercard to buy Flow (FLOW) instantly.Balance: Use funds from your HTX account balance to trade seamlessly.Third Parties: We've added popular payment methods such as Google Pay and Apple Pay to enhance convenience.P2P: Trade directly with other users on HTX.Over-the-Counter (OTC): We offer tailor-made services and competitive exchange rates for traders.Step 3: Store Your Flow (FLOW)After purchasing your Flow (FLOW), store it in your HTX account. Alternatively, you can send it elsewhere via blockchain transfer or use it to trade other cryptocurrencies.Step 4: Trade Flow (FLOW)Easily trade Flow (FLOW) on HTX's spot market. Simply access your account, select your trading pair, execute your trades, and monitor in real-time. We offer a user-friendly experience for both beginners and seasoned traders.

3.2k Total ViewsPublished 2024.03.29Updated 2026.06.02

How to Buy FLOW

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of FLOW (FLOW) are presented below.

活动图片