Aave Is Surrendering the Throne of DeFi Lending Due to Its Own Stupidity

Odaily星球日报2026-04-24 tarihinde yayınlandı2026-04-24 tarihinde güncellendi

Özet

Aave, a leading DeFi lending protocol, is facing a severe crisis and losing its dominant market position due to its poor handling of a recent security incident. The crisis began when Kelp DAO suffered a hack resulting in a loss of $292 million in rsETH. In the aftermath, approximately $17.2 billion in funds flowed out of Aave as user panic escalated. The article criticizes Aave's crisis management as "extremely foolish." Instead of promptly offering reassurance or committing to cover the potential bad debt—estimated between $123.7 million and $230.1 million, which Aave could have afforded—the protocol initially deflected blame, emphasizing that its code was not at fault. This delay and lack of a clear guarantee led to widespread user anxiety, triggering a bank run-like scenario where users withdrew funds or borrowed aggressively from other pools, causing liquidity shortages. Meanwhile, Aave’s competitor Spark—a fork of Aave’s own code—has benefited significantly. Having removed support for rsETH months earlier, Spark avoided any losses from the incident and has since seen its TVL grow by nearly $2 billion, attracting major deposits such as over $1.24 billion from Justin Sun. Spark has actively capitalized on the situation, publicly criticizing Aave’s security reputation. Although Aave’s founder Stani eventually announced a relief plan named "DeFi United" with several partners and a personal donation, the damage to user trust and capital outflows may be irreversible. The ar...

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Azuma (@azuma_eth)

$292 million, this is the total amount of rsETH funds stolen from Kelp DAO; $17.2 billion, this is the scale of funds that have flowed out of Aave since the incident.

Aave is watching as its extremely foolish crisis PR strategy allows community panic to ferment for several consecutive days, thereby losing its former biggest advantage in the lending track — hundreds of billions of dollars in deposited funds and the user perception label of "the safest DeFi".

Odaily Note: For background, please refer to "DeFi Hacked Again for $292 Million, Is Aave Not Safe Anymore?"; "The Tripartite Game Under the $290 Million Hole: Who Will Pay, Aave, L0, or Kelp?".

What Did Aave Do Wrong?

The details of the Kelp DAO hack incident need not be repeated. There's no point in blaming Aave for giving rsETH such a high LTV anymore. Here, I mainly want to discuss Aave's response strategy after the incident from the perspective of a long-term AAVE user.

First is the bad debt scale issue. Aave itself has done the math. Depending on the different handling of rsETH, there could be two possibilities for bad debt — If the stolen loss is written off from all circulating rsETH, it is expected to generate $123.7 million in bad debt; If the value of mainnet rsETH is protected, and the loss is fully accounted for in the mapped version of rsETH on Layer2, it is expected to generate $230.1 million in bad debt.

In either case, Aave has the financial strength to cover it with its Umbrella, DAO treasury, and team reserves. I understand that Aave is unwilling to pay this money itself and wants Kelp DAO, the main responsible party, and LayerZero, the secondary responsible party, to also contribute more. But the problem is, the other parties think the same way — "Aave is so rich, the situation is so awkward, surely they should bear more." Therefore, in the short term, it's difficult for these three parties to reach a consensus, meaning a solution that satisfies everyone is temporarily impossible.

But users cannot wait that long — Aave's yield levels have never been very competitive in the industry. Users who choose to deposit funds with Aave do so for its reputation, security, and liquidity. However, the current situation is that in the most critical days following the incident, Aave consistently failed to give users some kind of bottom-line guarantee promise, instead repeatedly emphasizing "our code is not the problem" and "Aave cannot control how rsETH is accounted for" to shift blame.

This is why panic continued to ferment within the community. Users tried every means to escape the risk, withdrawing directly if they could, or borrowing from other pools if they couldn't withdraw, causing the impact to gradually expand. So Aave's current situation is, on one hand, facing continuous fund outflows, and on the other hand, multiple pools are experiencing liquidity drying up due to utilization rates being maxed out.

This awkward situation could have been avoided (or at least not been this bad)...... Since Aave can afford the money, why not inject a dose of reassurance into the community from the start to prevent a bank run? At most, it's $230 million in bad debt (possibly less), and this money wouldn't necessarily be paid by Aave alone; they could negotiate with LayerZero and Kelp DAO later.

Now, it's done. For the sake of saving on a promise of relief worth at most $230 million, Aave watched as $17.2 billion in deposited funds flowed out (the number may continue to grow), and this doesn't even include the decline in the AAVE token price these days...... by any calculation, it's a disastrously bad deal.

What makes Aave even more uncomfortable is that the worse its situation becomes, the more relaxed opponents like LayerZero and Kelp DAO will be, because they will judge that Aave will be more motivated to solve the problem as soon as possible, which only puts Aave at a disadvantage in the博弈 (game theory).

Having reached this point, Aave has brought this upon itself.

Behind Aave, Spark Is Watching Closely

While Aave is suffering from headaches, the situation for its competitor Spark is booming and extremely positive. What's even more lamentable is that Spark is a competitor that Aave "personally incubated".

Spark was originally a lending protocol forked and developed by Sky (formerly MakerDAO) based on the open-source code of Aave V3. Both sides actually use the same underlying code logic. In return, there was once a profit-sharing agreement between Spark and Aave, but later Aave accused Spark of allegedly breaching the contract, and due to route differences, the two are now in a purely competitive relationship.

Three months before the Kelp DAO theft, Spark had just removed support for rsETH (for details, see "Different Fates on the Same Day: Aave Embraces rsETH and Loses Nearly $200M, Spark Exits Unscathed"). You can call it strategic conservatism, rigorous risk control, or even attribute it entirely to luck, but the result is that Spark was completely unaffected by this incident — on this point alone, Spark can brazenly attack Aave's former label of "safest DeFi".

Consequently, Spark became one of the safe havens for funds fleeing Aave. Since the incident, Spark's TVL has grown by nearly $2 billion (green part in the chart below). On the day of the incident, Justin Sun withdrew 53,665 ETH (worth $124 million) from Aave and subsequently deposited it into Spark. After further accumulation in recent days, the total deposit has reached $1.3 billion — In the DeFi world, Brother Sun's (Justin Sun) moves are really something to learn.

On April 23rd, Upbit officially announced the launch of the Spark (SPK) Korean Won trading market. SPK, stimulated by this positive news, surged over 80% in a single day, significantly narrowing the market capitalization gap with AAVE.

Even Wang Chun, founder of F2Pool, lamented on X: "In the past year, I received 83.7 million SPK rewards from Spark and sold them on CoWSwap for 663 ETH and $1.4 million. Now I kind of regret it."

Spark clearly realizes this is a perfect opportunity to seize market share from Aave's mouth. Since the incident, Spark's Strategy Lead, MonetSupply, has almost become the most vocal KOL on this matter, posting dozens of times a day. Although his comments do help the public understand what happened to some extent, they also objectively exacerbate the panic surrounding Aave.

But this is the purest form of commercial competition. MonetSupply simply made the most correct choice.

Aave Is Losing the Throne of DeFi Lending

In the early hours of April 24th, perhaps realizing the severity of the current situation, Aave founder Stani announced on X the launch of a relief plan called DeFi United. Participating collaborators include LayerZero, Ethena, ether.fi, Ink Foundation, Golem Foundation, Trydo, etc. Stani personally will also donate 5,000 ETH to help resolve the current issue.

But the funds have already flowed out, and user trust has been severely damaged. Relying solely on this belated statement, it will be difficult for Aave to quickly recover the deposited funds and user trust.

The DeFi lending track has long presented a "one superpower, many strong powers" pattern, with Aave一直以来 (yīzhí yǐlái - all along) having a seemingly extremely solid leading advantage. But now, Aave is surrendering the throne. Behind it, challengers are approaching menacingly. Besides the booming Spark, other opponents like Morpho and Jupiter Lend also hope to take a bite out of Aave's share.

Last year, Stani bought a five-story mansion in London for approximately $30 million, one of the most expensive transactions in the UK's sluggish luxury property market over the past year. I don't know if there's something like a "jinx," but following the examples of Su Zhu and others, it seems like big shots in the circle who consume conspicuously always run into some bad luck.

I can't guess what Stani is thinking right now in his five-story mansion.

İlgili Sorular

QWhat was the main reason for the massive outflow of funds from Aave following the Kelp DAO hack?

AAave's poor crisis management strategy, which failed to provide timely reassurance or a bailout guarantee to its users, leading to widespread panic and a bank run.

QWhat are the two potential bad debt scenarios calculated by Aave for the rsETH incident, and what are the amounts?

AIf the stolen loss is written off from all rsETH, the bad debt would be approximately $123.7 million. If the value of mainnet rsETH is protected and the loss is fully accounted for in the Layer2 mapped version of rsETH, the bad debt would be approximately $230.1 million.

QWhich competitor protocol directly benefited from the funds flowing out of Aave, and what was the approximate amount of TVL it gained?

ASpark Protocol directly benefited, gaining nearly $2 billion in Total Value Locked (TVL) following the incident.

QWhat was the name of the relief plan announced by Aave founder Stani Kulechov in response to the crisis, and what was his personal contribution?

AThe relief plan was named 'DeFi United'. Stani Kulechov personally donated 5,000 ETH to help resolve the situation.

QAccording to the article, what was the primary reason users traditionally deposited funds into Aave, given its uncompetitive yield rates?

AUsers primarily deposited funds into Aave due to its reputation for safety, security, and liquidity, not for competitive yield rates.

İlgili Okumalar

It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments

**Title: It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments** Over the past year, I've worked on infrastructure for the Agent economy, engaging with major players like Stripe, Visa, Coinbase, and numerous startups. The findings reveal a stark reality: genuine, widespread demand for Agent-based payments does not yet exist. **Key Observations:** * **Agent-to-Merchant (Shopping):** The user experience for AI shopping often falls short, especially for visual product discovery. While AI excels at understanding needs, conversational interfaces can't yet replace browsing and comparing multiple products visually. Current merchant interest is largely defensive ("Agent Engine Optimization") for a future that hasn't arrived. High-frequency, low-friction purchases (like food delivery) are potential fits, but lack open APIs and face high AI inference costs. Simpler, more affordable, or cross-language interactions for complex UIs are a niche opportunity but require massive consumer distribution to scale. * **Agent-to-API (Developer Tools):** Developer payment needs for APIs (computing, data, models) are already met through subscriptions and prepaid credits. The core challenge is not payment friction but supplier economics: most large SaaS providers prefer enterprise contracts over micropayments for API calls. Protocols like MPP and x402 suit the long-tail of smaller services but cater to a developer market historically reluctant to pay for these tools. Major infrastructure needs at the top of the stack are already being addressed. * **Agent-to-Agent (Machine Commerce):** This is a long-term vision with almost no current transaction volume. While a future with high-speed, high-frequency, multi-party machine-to-machine transactions would require novel infrastructure, it remains theoretical. The market is not here yet. * **Agent-to-Finance:** This is the only category with clear, present demand. Financial professionals and DeFi users already pay for tools, and AI augmentation is a natural evolution. Autonomous AI agents can enable entirely new financial strategies. However, competition is fierce from established, regulated incumbents who can more easily layer AI onto their existing products. **The Core Insight:** Companies, especially giants with long time horizons, are building defensively for a potential future of mass machine commerce. For them, early investment is a low-cost hedge. For startups, the current market reality is different. The primary challenge isn't just moving money between agents (payments). The larger, unsolved problem is **orchestration** – coordinating work between agents and humans, verifying outcomes, and then settling. Payment is just a part of settlement, which is just a part of orchestration. Companies that solve the orchestration problem will subsume payments, not the other way around. After a year of building, we see the real, growing, and underserved market opportunity lies in this broader domain of orchestration.

链捕手18 dk önce

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

A researcher discovered a critical "infinite mint" vulnerability in the Zcash cryptocurrency's Orchard protocol using Claude Opus 4.8, leading to a swift fix but also a 50% market drop, erasing billions in value. This incident highlights a new era where powerful, accessible AI models are dramatically lowering the barrier to finding software vulnerabilities. Previously, the security community feared specialized models like Claude Mythos Preview, capable of finding decades-old zero-day exploits. The Zcash case, however, involved a publicly available, general-purpose model. This shift makes advanced security auditing—and attack capabilities—accessible to far more people, not just experts. The mass democratization of vulnerability discovery brings a dual challenge: a flood of low-quality, AI-generated false reports that overwhelm maintainers, and the real, rapid uncovering of deep, dangerous bugs. Open-source projects, often understaffed and unfunded, are particularly vulnerable to this "attention DDoS." The article cites examples like curl shutting down its bug bounty program due to the unsustainable workload. Our perceived digital safety has often been luck, relying on the high cost and effort required to find deeply hidden flaws in complex systems, as seen with historical vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or Baron Samedit. AI changes this cost structure, effectively "mass-producing flashlights" to illuminate every corner of our codebase. While large companies operate extensive security chains involving external white-hat hackers and massive defensive operations, the global cybersecurity workforce faces a severe shortage, especially of experienced personnel capable of analyzing complex threats and coordinating fixes. The core dilemma emerges: AI makes *finding* bugs cheap and scalable, but *fixing* them remains a slow, expensive, and human-intensive process. The article concludes that AI won't destroy the internet but acts as a bright light, revealing that our digital existence is not inherently secure but is precariously maintained by ongoing human effort. The true cost in the AI era may not be discovery, but whether there will be enough people left willing and able to do the hard work of repair.

marsbit51 dk önce

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

marsbit51 dk önce

Ethereum Price Prediction: ETH Could Double While Cardano (ADA) and This Newcomer Token Near 500% Rally

As the cryptocurrency market anticipates a potential bull cycle, investor focus is shifting toward projects with high return potential. Ethereum (ETH), currently at approximately $2,014, is highlighted for its long-term value, with predictions suggesting a possible 2x increase to over $4,000. Cardano (ADA), trading around $0.2329, remains a choice for its research-driven development and scalability focus, though some seek higher upside elsewhere. Significant attention is drawn to Little Pepe (LILPEPE), a new Layer 2 Ethereum-compatible token priced at $0.0022 in its presale stage, which has raised over $28.19 million. The project aims to build a dedicated blockchain for meme communities, offering lower costs and faster transactions. Backers speculate a potential 500% gain, driven by strong presale demand, planned ecosystem features like staking and a launchpad, and active community engagement through giveaways. While Ethereum and Cardano are viewed as foundational investments, LILPEPE represents a newer, high-growth opportunity for investors targeting the meme coin sector.

TheNewsCrypto1 saat önce

Ethereum Price Prediction: ETH Could Double While Cardano (ADA) and This Newcomer Token Near 500% Rally

TheNewsCrypto1 saat önce

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

"Codex Goal Mode: How to Make AI Work Continuously Toward a Specific Goal" OpenAI's Codex "goal mode" (/goal) transforms the AI from a reactive code assistant into a proactive execution agent capable of working autonomously for hours or even days to achieve a defined objective. To maximize its effectiveness, follow these key principles: 1. **Define Clear, Verifiable Exit Criteria:** The goal prompt should be a concise, measurable success condition, not a lengthy specification. Use quantifiable metrics like "reduce build time by 30%" or "achieve 100% test parity." 2. **Provide Initial Guidance and Tools:** Direct Codex toward likely problem areas and specify available tools (e.g., browsers, testing environments) to prevent it from exploring unproductive paths. 3. **Enable Progress Measurement:** Equip Codex with ways to track advancement, such as creating comparison tools for visual tasks or evaluation sets, ensuring it can gauge its own progress. 4. **Use a Realistic Execution Environment:** For tasks like performance optimization, provide access to environments that closely mimic production (e.g., similar configs, databases) to yield valid results. 5. **Be Cautious with Visual Goals:** Avoid vague "pixel-perfect" instructions. Instead, supplement visual references with functional checklists or design system specifications to prevent Codex from obsessing over minor details. 6. **Implement Progress Tracking:** For long-running tasks, have Codex commit code to draft PRs, update progress documents, or send Slack updates to maintain visibility into its work. 7. **Review and Consolidate Results:** Once the goal is met, instruct Codex to review its work, clean up ineffective experimental code, and reflect on what strategies succeeded or failed. Ultimately, using goal mode shifts the developer's role from writing prompts to managing a persistent engineering agent—defining objectives, establishing metrics, configuring environments, and conducting final reviews.

marsbit2 saat önce

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

marsbit2 saat önce

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly Is This 'Slow Variable' That Vitalik Has Repeatedly Emphasized?

Recently, Vitalik Buterin has frequently emphasized the concept of "CROPS," first outlined in the Ethereum Foundation's March mandate as core principles guiding its focus: Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, and Security. CROPS represents Ethereum's commitment to providing foundational capabilities for user sovereignty—enabling asset ownership, identity expression, and coordination without reliance on centralized platforms or surrendering ultimate control. This framework is gaining new urgency with the rise of AI, particularly AI agents managing digital assets and automating transactions. While AI offers convenience, it risks centralizing user data, intent, and control if dependent on opaque, centralized services. Vitalik argues for "CROPS AI"—AI that is open, privacy-preserving, secure, and capable of local execution to maintain user agency. He highlights convergence between "CROPS Ethereum access layers" and "CROPS AI," such as using zero-knowledge proofs for private remote LLM calls and Ethereum RPC reads, ensuring users can access services without exposing sensitive information. Ultimately, CROPS is not just an abstract ideal but a practical guide for Ethereum's development and AI integration. It addresses the critical long-term question: as digital systems grow more powerful, how can users retain control over their privacy, assets, and autonomy? In an AI-driven era, these principles may define Ethereum's enduring value—prioritizing verifiable, secure, and user-centric design over short-term optimizations like speed and cost alone.

marsbit2 saat önce

From Ethereum to AI's 'CROPS': What Exactly Is This 'Slow Variable' That Vitalik Has Repeatedly Emphasized?

marsbit2 saat önce

İşlemler

Spot

Futures

Popüler Makaleler

AAVE Nasıl Satın Alınır

HTX.com’a hoş geldiniz! Aave Protocol (AAVE) satın alma işlemlerini basit ve kullanışlı bir hâle getirdik. Adım adım açıkladığımız rehberimizi takip ederek kripto yolculuğunuza başlayın. 1. Adım: HTX Hesabınızı OluşturunHTX'te ücretsiz bir hesap açmak için e-posta adresinizi veya telefon numaranızı kullanın. Sorunsuzca kaydolun ve tüm özelliklerin kilidini açın. Hesabımı Aç2. Adım: Kripto Satın Al Bölümüne Gidin ve Ödeme Yönteminizi SeçinKredi/Banka Kartı: Visa veya Mastercard'ınızı kullanarak anında Aave Protocol (AAVE) satın alın.Bakiye: Sorunsuz bir şekilde işlem yapmak için HTX hesap bakiyenizdeki fonları kullanın.Üçüncü Taraflar: Kullanımı kolaylaştırmak için Google Pay ve Apple Pay gibi popüler ödeme yöntemlerini ekledik.P2P: HTX'teki diğer kullanıcılarla doğrudan işlem yapın.Borsa Dışı (OTC): Yatırımcılar için kişiye özel hizmetler ve rekabetçi döviz kurları sunuyoruz.3. Adım: Aave Protocol (AAVE) Varlıklarınızı SaklayınAave Protocol (AAVE) satın aldıktan sonra HTX hesabınızda saklayın. Alternatif olarak, blok zinciri transferi yoluyla başka bir yere gönderebilir veya diğer kripto para birimlerini takas etmek için kullanabilirsiniz.4. Adım: Aave Protocol (AAVE) Varlıklarınızla İşlem YapınHTX'in spot piyasasında Aave Protocol (AAVE) ile kolayca işlemler yapın.Hesabınıza erişin, işlem çiftinizi seçin, işlemlerinizi gerçekleştirin ve gerçek zamanlı olarak izleyin. Hem yeni başlayanlar hem de deneyimli yatırımcılar için kullanıcı dostu bir deneyim sunuyoruz.

392 Toplam GörüntülenmeYayınlanma 2024.12.11Güncellenme 2026.06.02

Tartışmalar

HTX Topluluğuna hoş geldiniz. Burada, en son platform gelişmeleri hakkında bilgi sahibi olabilir ve profesyonel piyasa görüşlerine erişebilirsiniz. Kullanıcıların AAVE (AAVE) fiyatı hakkındaki görüşleri aşağıda sunulmaktadır.