Bear market melons continue to
The story begins when pNetwork causes potential losses of $250 million in order to recover $400,000 in pool liquidity.
Starting from the beginning, there was a problem with the cross-chain bridge between the pNetwork project. In order to save US$400,000 in liquidity, the so-called "white hat attack" was issued by pGALA, but this process did not "notify" Huobi to suspend recharge and withdrawal. As a result, GALA issued by days was recharged into Huobi for sale. Some people followed the trend of arbitrage and recharge coins and sold them away. Some people followed the trend of and bought the bottom of , but were forced to replace it with the valueless pGALA. The practices of
pNetwork project parties lack common sense of defi security, and without completely eliminating potential hazards, they injected over-issuance liquidity into the ecosystem, which is too hasty and irresponsible.
is facing a crisis. The user did not wait for the big picture of Sun Sei, but was blinded by a series of charming operations:
1) does not recognize the inaction of safety emergency response and risk control system
2) has not suspended charge and withdrawals. During this period, rumors of "shouting orders" internal man-made disasters are endless.
3) One-size-fits-all determination of the bottom-buying GALA user as an arbitrage attacker, and blocked the relevant assets
4) Finally, the finger was pointed at the pNetwork project party. The two sides started to fight
, Sun Chu, who has always been good at marketing, never expected to fail in "public relations". It took two days to find the real finger. The entire crisis process is handled in a messy and lacks order, lacks standard, and has a negative image of the "three majors" in everyone's hearts. users do not care about the "defense" of both parties, and their real money loss is real. Arbitrage users first followed suit and then rushed to defend their rights and controversy.
The security company that usually jumps out of popular science, warning and tracking is collectively absent from this GALA incident. The reason is simple: security audit and services can check all code defects, but it is difficult to fight against the potential "man-made disaster" crisis caused by industry ecological participants' eagerness for quick success and instant benefits.
This is a security crisis induced by a non-smart contract vulnerability, but it is more vigilant than any code vulnerability. The 250 million USD is the value calculated at the current price of GALA recharged for 6.6 billion USD. It is the book loss caused by Sun Cuo’s initial “big pattern” to pay for it. But now Huobi is criticized, so what is the loss of the potential trust crisis caused?
GALA storm has not yet passed, and the two former "partners" BN and FTX have also parted ways, and may have buried a huge thunder in the cryptocurrency market, which has the risk of inducing black swan .
. rumored that FTX's insolvency will burst. Although FTX currently holds assets greater than liabilities, a considerable part of the assets are composed of its own platform token FTT. That is, means that when there is a large-scale run on the platform, FTT may be sold in large quantities, resulting in insolvency and liquidation! After BN issued a liquidation FTT announcement, the war between the two sides entered a white-hot stage.
The cause of the incident:
1. Due to a private financial document reviewed by CoinDesk, it was disclosed that Alameda Research's balance sheet is full of FTT tokens issued by FTX. It is well known that in the bear market, such asset liquidity is very worrying, and Alameda is an asset management company under SBF.
2. With the outside world’s concerns, Alameda responded that the balance sheet disclosed by CoinDesk is a subset of our company entities, and we have more than $10 billion of assets not reflected there; given the tightening of crypto credit space this year, we have now returned most of the loans; we obviously have the unlisted hedge against .
3. Just when everyone thought this storm would come to an end, who knew that BN founder Zhao Changpeng suddenly came to an end and threw a bomb . CZ suddenly stated that BN received approximately US$2.1 billion of equivalent BUSD and FTT last year due to withdrawing from equity , a part of FTX's stake.
4. SBF, who has been silent about the Alameda incident, has to come out and speak out, saying that he has great respect for everything you have done to build the industry we see today, whether they pay back or not, and whether we use the same method. Including CZ. Anyway—as always—it's time to contribute to blockchain, not to argue.
5. CZ's response is very direct: clears our FTT just after exiting the risk management and learns from LUNA. We have supported it before, and we do not object to anyone. But we will not support those who are lobbying against other industry participants behind the scenes (here alluded to the previous SBF’s proposal to strengthen blacklist management of the crypto industry with DeFi front-end KYC, which sparked controversy).
6. Then SBF responded again: a bunch of unfounded rumors have been circulating. FTX's finances are audited and while it sometimes slows down our on product , we are highly regulated and we have processed billions of dollars in deposits/withdrawals today. Above (that implies that there are a large amount of withdrawals after the rumors appear, but the deposit and withdrawal are normal) there are also a large amount of USD/stablecoin conversions in progress. Finally you should do what you want to do, trade where you want to do. We thank those who stayed; when it all ends, we welcome others back.
FTX's stablecoin outflow is the largest outflow of all exchanges in the past 7 days, with a net outflow of $292 million. In the past 7 days, BN has inflows of $337 million, the largest entity with stablecoin inflows, with the current balance of $26.6 billion. The contradiction between
BN and FTX intensifies, and there are the following reasons: the friction between BN and FTX in the competition process; FTX has recently made Binance feel a challenge; BN has always been highly vigilant about its competitors; and its grasp of risk control.
In fact, the grudge between FTX and BN has been around for a long time.
Does this long-short showdown against FTT mean that the "tension" between the two has escalated again? Will FTX really storm?
SBF has a much greater influence than a series of cryptocurrency institutions represented by Sanjian Capital in the previous few months.
If really breaks out , the black swan in 2022, ~~~
