[dead]
Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
371–380 of 381 posts
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the links says the following: > According to crypto security firm Groom Lake, a Safe multisig wallet was deployed on Ethereum in 2019 and on the Base layer-2 in 2024 with identical transaction hashes. Ethereum’s alphanumeric transaction hashes are 64 characters long, so deploying the same smart contract transaction hash twice should be mathematically impossible. > The same transaction hash appearing on both Et…
The quote is incorrect. If I deploy the same smart contract to two different EVM chains, from the same wallet, with the same nonce (pretend it's the first transactions I'm doing with this wallet on each chain, so nonce 0), then the transaction hash will be the same on both chains. That's not odd.
The contract address will be the same but the transaction address should be different because transactions include the chainid in them. Otherwise you could easily replay transactions on other chains.
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#373It's obviously not a cold wallet if it's connected to the exchange.
Yeah this makes no sense whatsoever. > [The hacker] took control of the specific ETH cold wallet and transferred all the ETH in the cold wallet to this unidentified address. Did the hacker physically break into their office or what?
The wallet is a smart contract (specifically a gnosis safe), the malicious message they signed transferred ownership of that smart contract wallet to the attacker so they could then do whatever they want with it.
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know! As I stated, > Even considering a huge part of that volume is coming from institutional players who enjoy significantly reduced commission rates... But the volume is huge. Even if we take the best publicly shared MM rates from Bybit (which is 1.5bp taker commission, 0.5bp maker rebate), and assume the whole volume is traded with these rates, it is still 1bp from 40B dollars, which is 4M dollars daily.
even if this is true, they'll use their entire cashflow for more than a year to cover a single loss? That's not how business works...
It's not like they have a choice. If they don't they have to declare bankruptcy because they can't honor customer withdrawals.
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being doomed to spending millions of real dollars litigating to buy a trash dump full of used diapers and toxic waste, just to dig around in it looking for a hard disk drive for the rest of your life, seems to be a particularly satisfying Sisyphean form of justice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin_buried_in_Newport_land...
> After the 2008 bank bailout, Howells considered fiat currencies a "scam", favouring the vision of Bitcoin inventor Nakamoto instead. I wouldn’t call it justice, it’s more like falling down and instead of being helped up you’re just kicked some more. It feels like a cruel set of circumstances. It does feel like trying to find the drive is also living in denial, given the odds.
Oh no, it's justice. Sweet sweet justice. It's not like he worked hard for all the money he lost through stupidity and incompetence, or that it generated any value to the economy or society. Any competent IT professional knows very well about the importance of performing backups, and testing their backups. He may "subconsciously blame" his partner for losing the hard drive, but it was 100% his own fault he never bothered to back it up. He's doing just fine if he can afford all those legal fees, so he doesn't need to be "helped up", and playing the world's smallest violin in sympathy of his fate is hardly "kicking him".
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think he means the sheer volume
Mt. Gox (a former crypto exchange) was hacked in 2014 and the thieves stole nearly half a billion dollars in BTC. Considering how much more the currency is worth today and how much bigger the markets are, it seems like Bybit got off easy in terms of sheer volume.
Did they really steal 500mil in 2014? If yes that’s like a trillion now no?
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#377[dead]
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#378[dead]
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#379>Bybit CEO Ben Zhou wrote on X that a hacker "took control of the specific ETH cold wallet and transferred all the ETH in the cold wallet to this unidentified address." Um how tf does a cold wallet get hacked?
Have to wait for a post-mortem, but there was some speculation from Ben earlier in his spaces. They used a gnosis safe which is a smart contract multi-sig wallet that is pretty much the gold standard for Ethereum. They believed that all of the signers' pcs were hacked and that the UI for signing was staged with a fake element to make it appear like a normal transfer. They were signing with hardware wallets, but it's…
Thanks for the explanation. It wasn't a cold wallet.
Re: Bybit loses $1.5B in hack
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin, ETH, and Monero all have utility in one way or another. Bitcoin is accepted by most black markets (and Monero is even better for privacy). And software is built on top of the ETH chain. No one is buying stuff using DOGE or Trump coin. There's a clear difference between memecoins and legitimate cryptocurrencies whether you like them or not.
The question is: what makes a cryptocoin legitimate, in your opinion, considering that 'ilegitimate' memecoins are usually just a copy-paste version of a supposedly 'legitimate' cryptocoin?
If people are using them outside of speculation then I'd consider that legitimate. I'll concede that most of the market cap of cryptocurrencies is from speculation but at least Bitcoin, Ethereum, and a few other coins have use cases outside of that and for that reason, they will at the very least have some value even if that value is much closer to 0 than to what it is currently.