"White Hat" Hackers from Liquid Return $270M Worth of Bitcoin as Network Prepares for Restart

cryptonews.ru2026-09-08 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-09-08 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

"White hat" hackers have returned approximately 3,400 Bitcoin, worth around $270 million, to the Liquid federation wallet after a security incident on the Bitcoin sidechain. The hack, which occurred on Sunday, saw about 4,000 BTC withdrawn from a wallet holding roughly 4,200 BTC. The return followed on-chain negotiations between Blockstream, the company behind Liquid, and the perpetrators, who claimed the "white hat" label. Samson Mow of JAN3 stated the funds were returned after Blockstream confirmed updates to the affected bridge nodes. However, about 598 BTC remain unrecovered. Blockstream deployed updated software, and federation members are preparing for a coordinated network restart. Liquid issues L-BTC tokens backed by Bitcoin held in custody, so the return of about 85% of the withdrawn funds restores a significant portion of the lost collateral. Initial investigations pointed to an exploit via SideSwap's Peg-out authorization key, though both Liquid and SideSwap asserted the key itself was not compromised. SideSwap attributed the involved L-BTC to a bug in the open-source Elements software underlying the Liquid Network. Ledger's CTO, Charles Guillemet, questioned the "white hat" claim, suggesting the retained 600 BTC appeared more like extortion than a typical bug bounty if it was a pre-arranged reward. Neither Blockstream nor Liquid has publicly confirmed the unrecovered Bitcoin as a bounty or disclosed the return terms. Users are advised not to send Bitcoin to Liq...

Allegedly, "white hat" hackers have returned 3,400 Bitcoin, worth approximately $270 million, to the Liquid federation wallet after withdrawing around $320 million from the reserves of the Bitcoin sidechain.

On Monday, Samson Mow, CEO of JAN3 and former Blockstream executive, stated that the fund return followed Blockstream's confirmation of updated affected bridge nodes. According to him, about 598 $BTC remain unrecovered, and Blockstream continues to engage with the threat actors.

The fund return follows a security incident on Sunday during which hackers withdrew around 4,000 $BTC from a wallet containing approximately 4,200 $BTC. On-chain ledger data shows that exactly 3,400 $BTC were transferred back to the federation wallet address.

Blockstream reported that the updated software has been deployed, and federation members were preparing for a coordinated restart. Liquid issues L-$BTC backed by Bitcoin held by the federation, so the return of about 85% of the withdrawn Bitcoin restores a significant portion of the collateral lost in the incident, as the suspended network prepares to resume operations.

Bitcoin Return Followed On-Chain Negotiations

The initial withdrawal was conducted via SideSwap company's Peg-out authorization key, although both Liquid and SideSwap stated the key itself was not compromised. SideSwap reported that the L-$BTC involved originated from a bug in Elements — the open-source software underlying Liquid.

Blockstream contacted the threat actors via signed messages embedded in Bitcoin transactions. The threat actors, calling themselves "white hats," stated they would return most of the funds after the vulnerability was patched and the fix installed on each node.

Read also: Bitcoin From Satoshi Era Awakens After 16 Years of Inactivity: 600 $BTC Moved

Mow stated that Liquid remained suspended as Blockstream and federation members deployed additional fixes and security enhancements, resolved a chain split, and prepared for a safe restart. He urged users not to send Bitcoin to Liquid peg-in addresses until network restart is confirmed, adding that no other action is required from users.

Ledger CTO Charles Guillemet questioned the threat actors' claim of being "white hats" following the partial return. He said if the approximately 600 $BTC remaining under their control constituted a reward agreed upon through encrypted on-chain communications, this arrangement "looks more like extortion than a 'white hat' hack."

Neither Blockstream nor Liquid has publicly called the unrecovered Bitcoin a reward or disclosed the terms of the return. Cointelegraph contacted both companies for comment but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Magazine: "White Hats" Took 4,000 $BTC From Liquid, ETFs See Best 2026 Inflows: Hodler's Digest

end-content

İlgili Sorular

QWhat is the main event reported in this article regarding the Liquid sidechain and Bitcoin?

AThe article reports that hackers, who claim to be "white hats," returned 3,400 Bitcoins worth approximately $270 million to the Liquid federation wallet. This happened after they initially withdrew around 4,000 BTC from the wallet, and the Liquid network is preparing to restart following security updates.

QWho is Samson Mow, and what statement did he make regarding the situation?

ASamson Mow is the CEO of JAN3 and the former head of Blockstream. He stated that the return of funds followed confirmation from Blockstream about updating the affected bridge nodes. He also mentioned that about 598 BTC remained unreturned and that Blockstream continued to interact with the hackers.

QWhat was the alleged cause of the security incident that allowed the hackers to withdraw funds?

AAccording to the article, the incident involved an error in Elements, the open-source software underlying the Liquid sidechain. The hackers used a Peg-out authorization key from SideSwap to conduct the initial withdrawal, though both Liquid and SideSwap stated that the key itself was not compromised.

QHow did Blockstream communicate with the hackers, and what claim did the hackers make about themselves?

ABlockstream communicated with the hackers through signed messages embedded in Bitcoin transactions. The hackers claimed to be "white hats" and stated they would return most of the funds after the vulnerability was fixed and a patch was installed on every node.

QWhat criticism did Ledger's CTO, Charles Guillemet, raise about the hackers' actions?

ACharles Guillemet questioned the hackers' claim of being "white hats." He suggested that if the approximately 600 BTC remaining under their control was an agreed-upon reward negotiated via on-chain encrypted communications, it looked 'more like extortion than a white-hat hack.'

İlgili Okumalar

Founders Fund Leads $5 Million Token Purchase of ANVL: What Exactly is This "Non-Lending" DeFi Protocol Doing?

On October 6th, Founders Fund, led by Peter Thiel, invested $5 million to purchase ANVL tokens from the DeFi protocol Anvil's treasury. The round included participation from Pantera Capital and others, alongside angel investors like Compound founder Robert Leshner. Anvil is not a lending protocol. Instead, users lock assets like ETH or USDC into its vault to generate a verifiable on-chain "Letter of Credit" (LOC). This LOC acts as an economic guarantee, proving the user has sufficient locked collateral to back financial commitments, without borrowing funds. The protocol applies this mechanism to use cases like payment guarantees for merchants (via integration with Flexa) and enabling instant deposits for traders on exchanges like Bullish. Anvil's economic model is unique: it charges zero protocol fees. Its native token, ANVL, derives value solely from governance rights over parameters like supported collateral types. The total supply is 100 billion tokens. Despite an 83% price surge on the investment news, ANVL remains down approximately 89% from its all-time high. The protocol's Total Value Locked (TVL) has also fallen about 87% from its peak of ~$109 million in July 2025 to around $14 million currently. The investment represents a strategic bet that on-chain credit guarantees could become a significant category. Key factors to watch include the rate of real enterprise adoption through Anvil's SDK, the long-term sustainability of its zero-fee model, and the broader migration of traditional trade finance needs to blockchain infrastructure.

marsbit8 dk önce

Founders Fund Leads $5 Million Token Purchase of ANVL: What Exactly is This "Non-Lending" DeFi Protocol Doing?

marsbit8 dk önce

Mathematical Explosion: OpenAI Overnight Solves 722 Math Problems, Quasi-Riemann Hypothesis Proven

OpenAI has stunned the global mathematics and AI communities by releasing a GitHub repository containing 722 manuscripts addressing 372 previously unresolved major mathematical problem families, all reportedly generated by an unreleased internal AI model. The announcement, made without prior peer review, has provoked both excitement and alarm among mathematicians. The most notable breakthrough claims to be a proof of a "quasi-Riemann Hypothesis," establishing a zero-free region for Dirichlet L-functions with real part greater than 7/8 and eliminating the Landau-Siegel zeros—a significant leap in analytic number theory. The work has reportedly undergone formal verification using Lean. Other highlighted results include: unconditionally proving the NP-hardness of the basic semidefinite programming (SDP) threshold for approximation algorithms, based solely on P ≠ NP and circumventing the Unique Games Conjecture; proving the rational Hodge conjecture for abelian varieties with complex multiplication (CM); and resolving both the symmetric and asymmetric Mahler conjectures in convex geometry. According to OpenAI, most proofs were generated automatically by the model, with an average "thinking" time of just three hours per problem. This unprecedented scale and speed have sparked intense debate about the future of human mathematicians. While some express fear about the concentration of intellectual power, others see it as the dawn of a new era of discovery driven by AI. The mathematical world is now tasked with scrutinizing these claims, which, if verified, would represent historic milestones.

marsbit42 dk önce

Mathematical Explosion: OpenAI Overnight Solves 722 Math Problems, Quasi-Riemann Hypothesis Proven

marsbit42 dk önce

As Midterm Elections Approach, the Real Trade in U.S. Stocks Isn't About Who Wins

With the US midterm elections approaching in early November, political uncertainty has re-emenrged as a market variable. While market participants are weighing potential shifts in congressional control and policy direction, historical data suggests midterm elections themselves are not a definitive negative catalyst for US equities. Since 1937, the S&P 500 has averaged a positive gain of 9.2% in midterm election years, though this lags behind the 13.3% average for non-election years. A more consistent historical pattern is increased market volatility and a tendency for stronger performance concentrated in the fourth quarter, as political uncertainty is resolved. The article, citing analysis from J.P. Morgan and Capital Group, argues that the market's primary concern is policy path uncertainty rather than which party wins. This uncertainty tends to depress markets in the run-up to the vote, with a potential rebound afterward as the political risk premium dissipates. However, the article cautions against attributing market performance solely to the election. Recent midterm years like 2018 and 2022 saw significant market declines primarily driven by factors like Federal Reserve tightening and inflation, not the election outcome itself. The core argument is that the midterm election's impact on markets is often secondary to more fundamental drivers. Regardless of whether the result is a unified or divided government, the market's longer-term trajectory has historically been determined by underlying economic conditions. For the current environment, the key variables to watch post-election are not political labels but the path of interest rates, corporate earnings trends, and whether any actual policy changes materially alter cash flow expectations for businesses. The election may influence sentiment and policy expectations, but the sustainability of any year-end rally will ultimately depend on these core fundamentals of profitability, rates, and economic data.

marsbit47 dk önce

As Midterm Elections Approach, the Real Trade in U.S. Stocks Isn't About Who Wins

marsbit47 dk önce

AI Can't Change 'DNA': How Long Can SanDisk Stay Strong?

**AI Cannot Alter the "DNA": How Much Longer Can Western Digital's Run Last?** This analysis examines the sustainability of the current "super cycle" for NAND flash memory, driven by AI, with a focus on Western Digital (WD). The core argument is that while AI demand has fundamentally shifted NAND's role from a data warehouse to an essential component on the compute path, especially for AI inference, this does not eliminate the industry's cyclical nature. The piece first assesses the supply-demand dynamics. On the supply side, major producers are showing capital expenditure restraint for NAND, prioritizing DRAM/HBM. Capacity growth through 2028 relies heavily on technological upgrades (increasing 3D layers to 300+) and expansion primarily from China's YMTC, rather than new fabs. Global new fab capacity from players like Samsung and WD/Kioxia is concentrated post-2029. This results in estimated bit supply growth (CAGR ~24% for 2026-2028) largely driven by higher per-wafer output. Demand is undergoing a structural shift. AI-related NAND demand (for data lakes, KV cache, and staging) is forecast to grow at a 75% CAGR from 2025-2028, becoming the dominant driver. Data center demand will surpass 50% of total NAND demand in 2026. Consumer demand (PC, smartphone) is being squeezed and is expected to decline or stagnate. A key 2027 demand catalyst is NVIDIA's Rubin platform with its dedicated contextual memory storage (ICMS). The analysis concludes that a supply-demand deficit will persist into 2027. However, 2028 is identified as a potential inflection point where supply (led by YMTC's new fab) could outpace demand, ending the price rally. For Western Digital, the analysis models a more conservative path than management's guidance. It forecasts Average Selling Price (ASP) peaking in FY28 (ending June 2028) before declining in FY29-30 as the market loosens, though supported by long-term agreements (LTAs) and a higher mix of data center products. Consequently, margins and profits are expected to peak in FY28 and then contract. The valuation suggests WD's current price largely reflects a neutral scenario, with limited short-term upside unless the market becomes convinced that prices will remain stable post-2028. The fundamental takeaway is that despite AI's transformative impact, NAND's cyclical "DNA" remains intact.

marsbit1 saat önce

AI Can't Change 'DNA': How Long Can SanDisk Stay Strong?

marsbit1 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot
活动图片