“The SAFE report on the results of a $ 1.46 billion break is written in vague and leaves more questions than answers. This was stated by Binance founder Changpen Chzhao (CZ). I USULY TRY NOT to Criticize Other Industry Players, But I Still Do It Once in A While. 😂 This update from safe is not that green. IT USES VAGUE LANGUAGE TO […]”, – WRITE: Businessua.com.ua
The SAFE report on the results of a $ 1.46 billion break is written in vague and leaves more questions than answers. This was stated by Binance founder Zhao (CZ).
I USULY TRY NOT to Criticize Other Industry Players, But I Still Do It Once in A While. 😂
This update from safe is not that green. IT USES VAGUE LANGUAGE TO BRUSH OVER The Issues. I have more quests than Answers after reading it.
1. What does “Compromising a safe… https://t.co/vxywhyzqxb
– cz 🔶 bnb (@cz_binance) February 26, 2025
“I usually try not to criticize other representatives of the industry, but from time to time I still do it,” he wrote.
According to a wallet team, Lazarus Group attacked Bybit with a compromised SAFE {Wallet} developer machine. The result was a proposal of a masked harmful transaction. The incident occurred during the transfer of funds from the cold storage.
“Lazarus is a northern Korean hacker group sponsored by the state, which is well known for sophisticated social engineering attacks on developers’ credentials, sometimes in combination with zero vulnerators,” the report authors said.
Expertise did not show any vulnerability in the smart contractions of the wallet or the output code of the front and service. The Safe {Wallet} team has taken additional measures to eliminate the attack vector, they added.
According to CZ, the conclusions presented did not answer a number of important questions:
The co -founder of Gnosis Gnosis, which stands behind SAFE, Martin Koppelman presented CZ some explanations.
thank @cz_binance
1) The Interface was compromison – there was no bug in the Interface Code But Insthead they Got Access to the Server Via A Compromised Developer Machine.2) The Interface was modified spcifically Targeting the BYBIT SAFE. SO WHEN BYBIT Wuld DO A transaction -…
– Koepelmann.th 🦉💳 (@Koepelmann) February 26, 2025
In general, he repeated the thesis from the report on the vector of the attack and was unable to explain the methods of deception of the signatories. According to Koppelman, BYBIT storage was really one of the largest and, perhaps, the first was such an attack – which is why hackers tried to hide her traces.
The entrepreneur also spoke about the developed measures to strengthen the safety of transactions.
As for the third question, CZ was answered by Ledger Technical Director Charles. According to him, the provider of hardware wallets provides a number of solutions to ensure the safety of transactions, but it is difficult to integrate them into SAFE because of technical features.
A Complete Answer to (3) Here: https://t.co/u18k7OX5C
– Charles Guillemet (@P3B7_) February 26, 2025
“For me, the most important conclusion from BYBIT is as follows: companies and financial institutions should use a solution to store corporate data. The placement of $ 1.46 billion in the free smart contract of SAFE {Wallet} with a group of signatories developed for retail users should be a remnant of the past, ”the programmer said.
Recall that the co -founder of Blockstream and Adam Beck’s cipher came to the conclusion that the cause of the hacking of the exchange was the “wrong design EVM”.
The gun
Please wait …