Venus Protocol Detects $3.7M Supply Cap Attack on THE Pool

TheNewsCryptoОпубліковано о 2026-03-16Востаннє оновлено о 2026-03-16

Анотація

Venus Protocol detected a suspicious trading activity in its THE token liquidity pool on March 15. The incident, identified as a supply cap attack, occurred in two phases. First, the attacker accumulated approximately 84% of the total Thena token market capitalization. Then, they used these holdings as collateral to borrow other assets, including 6.67 million CAKE tokens, 1.58 million USDC, 2,801 BNB, and 20 Bitcoin, resulting in over $3.7 million in losses. Only the CAKE and THE pools were directly affected. In response, Venus halted all THE borrows and withdrawals, as well as those for other low-liquidity tokens. This attack represents a notable protocol-level exploit in DeFi for 2024.

On March 15, Venus Protocol revealed that it has found some suspicious trading activity in its liquidity pool for the Thena (THE) token. For clarification, Venus operates as a lending and borrowing platform, and THE is the native token of the Thena DeFi platform.

Venus has appointed Allez Labs as its risk manager, which stated that the incident seems to be a supply cap attack and it unravelled in two phases. The first phase shows that the attacker gradually collected around 84% of the overall Thena token market capitalisation.

The second phase included the attacker using those holdings as collateral to borrow other assets from the platform. The borrowed assets comprised 6.67 million CAKE tokens, 1.58 million USDC, 2,801 BNB, and 20 Bitcoin, as reported by Allez Labs.

The overall value lost in the attack surpassed $3.7 million, revealed by Wu Blockchain. Only the CAKE and THE pools were directly impacted by the exploit.

The Notable Attack

Venus Protocol replied by halting all THE borrows and withdrawals quickly. The team mentioned in a statement that this will stay in effect until the investigation is taken to end. As an extra precaution, Allez Labs mentioned Venus also shut withdrawals and borrowing for various other low-liquidity tokens on the platform.

The attack is one of the more noteworthy decentralised finance security incidents of this year. The overall losses via crypto hacks slipped to $49 million in February, the lowest monthly figure in around a year, as per the blockchain security company PeckShield.

That slip in hack-associated losses was, although, accompanied by a surge in phishing and social-engineering attacks aiming at individual users.

Nominis, a blockchain intelligence platform, mentioned that a lot of individual attacks in February comprised phishing websites, malicious signature requests, and address poisoning scams made to steal private keys.

The Venus incident shows a different threat category, one aiming protocol-level mechanics instead of individual user credentials.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Playnance Partners With KGeN to Expand Web3 Gaming Distribution Network

TagsHackHack AttackVenus

Пов'язані питання

QWhat type of attack did Venus Protocol detect on its THE pool?

AVenus Protocol detected a supply cap attack on its THE pool.

QWhat was the total value of assets lost in the attack on Venus Protocol?

AThe total value lost in the attack surpassed $3.7 million.

QWhich two token pools were directly impacted by the exploit?

AOnly the CAKE and THE pools were directly impacted by the exploit.

QWhat immediate action did Venus Protocol take in response to the attack?

AVenus Protocol halted all THE borrows and withdrawals, and also shut withdrawals and borrowing for various other low-liquidity tokens on the platform.

QWhat was the first phase of the attack as described by risk manager Allez Labs?

AIn the first phase, the attacker gradually collected around 84% of the overall Thena token market capitalisation.

Пов'язані матеріали

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.

marsbit10 хв тому

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

marsbit10 хв тому

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

On the night of February 9th, GitHub suffered a major outage caused by a simple configuration change—reducing a cache refresh interval from 12 to 2 hours—that triggered a cascade of failures. This was not an isolated event, but part of a broader pattern. In early 2026, GitHub experienced at least 8 major incidents, failing to meet its promised 99.9% availability. These outages stemmed from structural issues: explosive growth in load, tight service coupling, and insufficient protection against abnormal traffic. This unprecedented load is driven by AI Agents. In 2025, GitHub handled ~1 billion commits. By 2026, weekly commits reached 275 million, projecting to ~14 billion for the year—a 14x increase. AI tools like Claude Code now contribute 4.5% of all public repository commits, with weekly submissions surging 25x in just three months. AI-generated pull requests jumped from 4 million to 17 million per month in half a year. Unlike human developers, AI Agents work continuously, generating commits at a scale that overwhelms infrastructure designed for human rhythms. The surge also shattered GitHub's business model. Copilot's flat-rate pricing, based on assisting human developers, became unsustainable as Agentic AI sessions consumed resources worth hundreds of dollars for a few dollars in fees. In response, GitHub imposed usage limits and, by June 1st, shifted to a pay-per-use "AI Credits" system. Facing this new reality, GitHub realized a 10x scaling plan was insufficient. It announced a need to *redesign* its architecture for 30x current scale—decoupling services, adding fault isolation, and improving change management to prevent cascading failures. Other platforms like Stripe and AWS are facing similar challenges with AI Agents. Fundamentally, GitHub is transitioning from a human collaboration platform to an "exhaust pipe" for automated AI workflows. Its detailed post-mortem reports aim to maintain trust during this turbulent rebuild. The February outage was not just a technical glitch, but a signal of the software industry's entry into a new, AI-driven era.

marsbit50 хв тому

GitHub, Transfixed by AI

marsbit50 хв тому

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

Facing massive paper losses exceeding $90 billion each amidst a sharp market downturn, "Digital Asset Treasury" (DAT) giants Strategy and Bitmine find themselves in a precarious position, but with different underlying risks. Strategy, heavily invested in Bitcoin (BTC), faces significant financial strain. Its strategy relies heavily on debt, including convertible notes and preferred stock (STRC) requiring substantial dividend payments. With its cash reserves dwindling and BTC offering no staking yield for cash flow, Strategy's high leverage makes it vulnerable. A continued price decline could force asset sales to meet obligations, potentially creating a negative feedback loop. Its market value has already fallen sharply. In contrast, Bitmine, an Ethereum (ETH) holder, appears on firmer financial ground. It primarily funds its purchases through equity offerings (like ATM programs), avoiding debt pressure. It also generates income by staking a large portion of its ETH holdings. While not immune to market drops and shareholder dilution concerns, Bitmine maintains more flexibility, recently announcing a new preferred share offering to raise further capital. The core divergence lies in their financing: Bitmine uses equity (investor money), while Strategy uses debt (borrowed money). Consequently, Bitmine currently faces less immediate liquidity pressure than Strategy, which must navigate the dual challenge of servicing debt/dividends and a declining core asset (BTC) price.

marsbit57 хв тому

Both Suffer Massive Losses Exceeding $90 Billion, Which Is in Greater Peril: Strategy or Bitmine?

marsbit57 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片