$10M Gone: Thorchain Exploit Triggers Security Fears Across DeFi

bitcoinist2026-05-17 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-05-17 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

Blockchain tracker Arkham Intelligence has identified wallets linked to a THORChain exploit, holding approximately $3 million in Bitcoin and 216 ETH. On-chain investigator ZachXBT first reported the suspicious activity, estimating total losses now exceed $10 million. The attackers moved assets like USDT, USDC, and wrapped Bitcoin across multiple chains before converting to ETH. The cross-chain trading protocol was hit simultaneously on Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Base. Security firm PeckShield confirmed the breach. Following the news, THORChain's native token RUNE dropped nearly 14%. The project's team had not issued a public statement at the time of reporting, increasing market anxiety. This incident highlights the recurring vulnerability of cross-chain infrastructure in DeFi, where complex code can create significant security risks. The stolen funds remain in the identified wallets for now.

Blockchain tracking firm Arkham Intelligence has labeled a set of suspicious wallets as “THORChain Exploiter” addresses, with one Bitcoin-linked wallet holding close to 36.85 BTC — worth roughly $3 million — and a separate Ethereum wallet carrying around 216 ETH. The funds are sitting there, visible on-chain, linked to two addresses that security researchers have already flagged publicly.

Who Found It First

The person who spotted the attack before anyone else did was on-chain investigator ZachXBT. He reported suspicious movement tied to THORChain’s router infrastructure, describing how attackers shifted roughly $7.2 million in assets — including USDT, USDC, and wrapped Bitcoin — across several blockchains before converting them into ETH.

His initial estimate of losses above $7.4 million was later revised upward. The total stolen, according to ZachXBT, may now exceed $10 million.

THORChain is a cross-chain trading protocol that lets users swap crypto assets across different blockchains without relying on a centralized exchange. That design also means its infrastructure touches multiple networks at once — and in this case, that became a vulnerability. The attack hit Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Base simultaneously.

Security firm PeckShield independently confirmed the breach. Based on their estimates, attackers walked away with around 36.75 BTC worth close to $3 million, along with roughly $7 million more pulled from the Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Base ecosystems.

BTCUSD now trading at $77,926. Chart: TradingView

Markets React, Team Goes Quiet

RUNE, THORChain’s native token, dropped close to 14% in the hours following news of the breach, sliding toward the $0.50 mark as traders moved to cut their exposure. The price drop was fast. The official response was not.

As of reporting, THORChain had not issued a public statement explaining the scope of the exploit or what steps were being taken to address it.

That silence has added to the anxiety in the market. The protocol survived earlier security incidents by tapping into treasury reserves and recovery mechanisms, but without clarity from the team, it is difficult to know whether a similar path is possible this time.

A Pattern That Keeps Repeating

Cross-chain infrastructure has repeatedly been the site of major losses in decentralized finance. Bridges and routing systems that connect different blockchains require complex code — and complex code creates more opportunities for something to go wrong. The THORChain attack fits that pattern.

The stolen assets remain in the flagged wallets for now. Whether they stay there is another question.

Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

İlgili Sorular

QHow much was stolen in the THORChain exploit according to the latest estimate by on-chain investigator ZachXBT?

AAccording to the latest estimate by on-chain investigator ZachXBT, the total stolen amount may exceed $10 million.

QWhich specific blockchains were impacted by the THORChain exploit mentioned in the article?

AThe attack impacted Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Base simultaneously.

QWhat happened to the price of THORChain's native token (RUNE) following news of the security breach?

AFollowing news of the breach, THORChain's native token (RUNE) dropped close to 14%, sliding toward the $0.50 mark.

QAccording to the article, why is cross-chain infrastructure like THORChain's particularly vulnerable to attacks?

ACross-chain infrastructure is particularly vulnerable because bridges and routing systems require complex code, and complex code creates more opportunities for something to go wrong.

QWhat action had the THORChain team taken regarding the exploit at the time of the article's reporting?

AAt the time of the article's reporting, THORChain had not issued a public statement explaining the scope of the exploit or what steps were being taken to address it.

İlgili Okumalar

Ethena price prediction: Will the $0.08 zone keep ENA’s recovery alive?

The Ethena (ENA) price has risen 14.11% from its July 8 low, recovering the $0.08 resistance zone to trade at $0.082. Despite this recent gain, the overall trend remains bearish, with the token down 94% from its all-time high. Positive developments include the launch of the Robinhood Earn feature, where ENA represented over 70% of user asset allocations, significantly boosting the Robinhood Chain's TVL. However, a large transfer of 1.231 billion ENA ($94 million) between unknown wallets created mixed signals. Technical analysis shows long-term bearish dominance, with price action below key former support. The ongoing bounce from $0.08 requires sustained buying pressure to continue. Key resistance is seen at the $0.105-$0.125 zone. Analysts suggest a potential bounce to that zone could present a selling opportunity, while current price levels offer unclear risk-reward for swing traders. The $0.08 level is crucial for keeping the recovery alive.

ambcrypto32 dk önce

Ethena price prediction: Will the $0.08 zone keep ENA’s recovery alive?

ambcrypto32 dk önce

Claude Accused of Becoming Dumber by the Entire Internet, Anthropic Steps In to Reveal: It’s Not the Model That’s Tricking You

When users complained that Claude was "getting dumber," the root cause wasn't the AI model itself. In an official blog post, Anthropic clarified the critical difference between two key settings in Claude Code: Model and Effort. Model refers to the core "brain"—the fixed, trained weights of a specific AI (like Sonnet, Opus, or Fable). Changing the Model addresses *capability* ("can it do this?"), but its knowledge is static post-training. Effort, however, controls the AI's *approach and thoroughness* for a specific task. A higher Effort level instructs Claude to read more files, run tests, perform verification, and complete multi-step reasoning before responding, significantly increasing its "work output" for that job. Conversely, low Effort leads to quicker, less thorough replies. This distinction explains the March 2024 uproar where users experienced a sudden drop in Claude's performance. The cause was not a model change but Anthropic quietly lowering the *default* Effort setting from "high" to "medium" to reduce latency, which was later reverted. The key insight is that a smaller, capable model (like Sonnet) on high Effort can often outperform a larger, more powerful model (like Opus) on low Effort for many tasks. The article provides a practical troubleshooting framework: if Claude makes an error, first check the context and instructions. If it seems to skip necessary steps or validations, increase Effort. If it diligently attempts the task but fails conceptually or makes consistent factual errors despite good context, then consider switching to a more capable Model. The takeaway is a shift in focus: effective AI programming is less about always choosing the "strongest" model and more about intelligently *orchestrating* models and effort levels—acting like a project manager to assign the right "brain" with the right level of diligence for each job, optimizing both results and cost.

marsbit38 dk önce

Claude Accused of Becoming Dumber by the Entire Internet, Anthropic Steps In to Reveal: It’s Not the Model That’s Tricking You

marsbit38 dk önce

Will the Ethereum Foundation Evolve into a 'Mascot'? Diversified Organizations Are Fragmenting Its Functions

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) is undergoing significant internal turmoil and functional erosion. Following its largest-ever layoff of 54 staff (20% of its workforce) and a major organizational restructuring announced in June, its Protocol Support Team has been officially dissolved. This comes alongside the high-profile resignation of key figures like co-executive director Xiaowei Wang, bringing senior departures this year to at least eight. Criticism of EF's rigid structure, opaque decision-making, and perceived lack of a clear value narrative for ETH has intensified within the community. The layoffs have catalyzed the emergence of independent, non-profit organizations like Ethlabs and Ethereum Institutional, founded by former EF researchers and members. These entities are now taking on core functions such as protocol research/development and institutional adoption, effectively fragmenting the EF's traditional leadership role. Concurrently, EF's security team is adapting to technological change, deploying specialized AI agents to audit Ethereum's codebase, which successfully discovered a critical vulnerability (CVE-2026-34219). While EF states AI complements rather than replaces researchers, it signals a potential future shift in its operational model. Faced with these challenges—internal restructuring, talent drain, the rise of competing organizations, and AI integration—the Ethereum Foundation appears to be stepping back from a central commanding role. Analysts and community observers speculate it may increasingly transition towards a symbolic "ecosystem mascot" function, while decentralized initiatives drive Ethereum's future growth and institutional adoption.

marsbit1 saat önce

Will the Ethereum Foundation Evolve into a 'Mascot'? Diversified Organizations Are Fragmenting Its Functions

marsbit1 saat önce

Is LIT’s burn worth $42 million enough to spur the altcoin’s next big rally?

Lighter (LIT) has experienced significant volatility, rallying 18% over the past week but facing potential overbought conditions. After a warning of a correction toward $2, the price dipped to $2.3 before recovering to $2.60. A major catalyst was the recent burn of over 15.6 million LIT tokens (worth ~$42 million), representing 6.3% of the circulating supply, which may have spurred short-term bullish momentum toward $3. Technical analysis on the 1-day chart shows a bearish divergence with the RSI, signaling a potential pullback despite strong demand. The key Fibonacci retracement level to watch is $2.30. On the 4-hour chart, LIT is forming a range between $2.31 and $2.68. The suggested strategy is to wait for a breakout above $2.70 to target $3.06-$3.21, or a breakdown below $2.31 for a likely deeper retracement below $2. In summary, while bullish momentum persists, traders should monitor the range boundaries for the next directional move.

ambcrypto3 saat önce

Is LIT’s burn worth $42 million enough to spur the altcoin’s next big rally?

ambcrypto3 saat önce

Nearly a Hundred Players Rush into Embodied Data: With 4.47 Billion Yuan in Financing in One Year, Who Can Really Make Money by 'Selling Data'?

The domestic embodied AI data industry has attracted nearly 100 players, with 70 focused on data collection and 27 on data infrastructure. In the past year, 15 independent embodied data service providers raised approximately 4.47 billion yuan. Despite this growth, the sector remains early-stage, fragmented, and faces significant challenges. Data collection methods are diverse, categorized into four main routes: teleoperation of real robots, human demonstration without a robot (using motion capture, exoskeletons, etc.), simulation synthesis, and distillation from internet videos. Most companies (43%) adopt hybrid approaches, combining multiple routes, as no single method can meet all training needs. Teleoperation alone is pursued by 31% of players, often by state-owned platforms and robot companies, while newer firms favor asset-light, no-hardware human demonstration. Independent data service providers now form the largest player group (40%), indicating the emergence of a distinct industry segment rather than just a subsidiary function for robot makers. Two-thirds of all players are "embodied-native" startups, while one-third are companies that pivoted from fields like AI data annotation, which are more prevalent in the data infrastructure layer. Current annual industry capacity is estimated at 1.6-1.8 million hours plus 70-80 million data points, with a short-term goal to increase this 15-20 fold within 1-3 years. Data collection factories are spread across 20 provinces in China, concentrated in the Yangtze River Delta, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, and Pearl River Delta regions. Financially, the 4.47 billion yuan raised in the past year pales compared to the 43.8 billion yuan raised by the broader embodied intelligence sector in just the first half of 2026, highlighting that data remains a less "sexy" bet for investors. The 15 funded independent providers show clear stratification: a top tier led by a unicorn (Lightwheel Intelligence, 3.1 billion yuan), a middle tier of 11 firms raising tens to hundreds of millions, and an early-stage tier of 3 companies. Sixty-nine investment institutions have participated, but none have made concentrated bets, reflecting uncertainty about viable business models. Over half of these funded companies are less than a year old, most are at pre-A or A rounds, and profitability remains largely unproven. In summary, the embodied data industry has become an independent track creating jobs and local economic activity. However, it is still nascent, with unformed consensus, unsolved problems, and unproven business models. The coming 1-2 years will be a critical validation window to see if companies can build sustainable, profitable businesses purely by "selling data."

marsbit4 saat önce

Nearly a Hundred Players Rush into Embodied Data: With 4.47 Billion Yuan in Financing in One Year, Who Can Really Make Money by 'Selling Data'?

marsbit4 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
活动图片