AlP3R_Cr1pT0

The Mandalorian is a master of crypto trades and a guardian of decentralized principles👊

[Matt lander @m477lander]

I keep saying this; show people what they're signing

Tried @phantom new gasless EVM swap on @base today.

Fresh burner. normal EOA. 0 eth. 5 used. Zero approvals.

Wallet:
https://t.co/lm3WsrtoFR
funding:
https://t.co/YqB1Me5622

Enable smart account delegation. Pay gas in USDC. swap 2 usdc for WETH.
Worked. No eth needed.

https://t.co/TrmlAZVUQG

Then Remove account delegation

Phantom removed it. Wallet is an eoa again.

https://t.co/ErkiSrLqUc

Opened @RevokeCash
7702 gone.

Two USDC approvals from that same swap still there

Near-max // Unlimited to @0xProject AllowanceHolder:
0x0000000000001fF3684f28c67538d4D072C22734

Plus paymaster 0x2cc0c7981D846b9F2a16276556f6e8cb52BfB633: leftover 0.006121 usdc. Dust

I signed it. That's the point.
Neither spender nor amount showed up on enable, swap review, or remove. I had to open an explorer and https://t.co/HDa1fj77tn to see what the swap had actually approved.

Phantom help article covers 7702, alchemy, temporary delegation, and remove. Not the token approvals. Not the amounts Not that they survive remove..
https://t.co/QjVaGBaXpk

@0xProject says AllowanceHolder is formally verified. Fine.
https://t.co/FzW1dTX6gf

Phantom still created a near-max approval, didn't show it, and left it after Remove

It has no expiry. Future USDC is covered too.
Old approvals already get people drained. @RevokeCash tracks more than $495M stolen through approval exploits since 2020 -
https://t.co/MdUXybksJH

ekubo in May 2026; 31 addresses, about $1.43M lost after a router bug met existing approvals.
Different contract The bug came later. The approvals were already there.
https://t.co/9J4p00E058

Tried to revoke both through https://t.co/HDa1fj77tn. It generated approve(0)

Phantom: Not enough ETH.

No tx
Gasless in. Native ETH to clean up after.

Nice.

Phantom own guide sends EVM users to https://t.co/HDa1fj77tn to inspect and revoke approvals:
https://t.co/ol24ulI2F7
@phantom, the swap worked. The permission UX didn't.

Show both approvals before I sign. Say exactly what Remove clears. Let me wipe the leftovers before you flip the wallet back to EOA.....

[Matt lander @m477lander]

I've spent the last few years betting that the wallet becomes the whole trading app,, so "Web3 is dead" is where you lose me.

@fomo and @Pumpfun nailed the product loop; see it, buy it, never leave the app. that's a product win. It doesn't mean the old distribution playbook is dead.

People aren't dpne with Web3. They're done dealing with the plumbing: chains, bridges, gas, dApp hops. Hide that shit. if the wallet connection step disappears from the screen, great. The uX got better. The wallet and protocols didn't die.

But a deposit in every app plus Google/X login? We just moved the mess from chains into apps and put a web2 account next to my money. How is that an upgrade?

A wallet can be the whole mobile trading app. I keep the keys and can recover if the app vanishes.

If something moves on @BNBCHAIN while my money is on @solana , I shouldn't need another app. Same if it's on @ton_blockchain . One place to check it and trade it. spot, perps whatever. Let the app handle routes, bridges and gas.
Apple Pay to fund it, Face ID to unlock. Google/X doesn't need to be the door to my wallet. My wallet doesn't need my identity.

i don't want the bank back in the middle.

[Nick Almond @DrNickA]

ok my 2 cents on the Solana Governance Proposals

SGP-1. Biased obviously but YES. This was cooking for a full year with very wide consultation. It's as simple a framework as possible with an amendment process that will give us license to iterate it over the coming years. The only danger it will fail is if it fails quorum, perhaps because people got sidetracked by the economic proposals. Without it we go back to governance meta chat and arguing about what quorum should be etc. Let's hope it clears.

SGP-2, less obviously a YES, but still a YES if I was voting with stake. Largely because I don't think it matters that much and isn't that harmful. My preference would be to leave the current curve. Solana is still very much in growth mode and I think the inflationary dynamic juices the yields on the asset enough to make it very attractive for institutional buyers. I'm less convinced that a couple of points of inflation matter than much at this stage especially in the context of many competitors which are still wrestling with vast insider bag overhang. largely I think all the inflation reduction chat is bear market thinking. A solid bull run wipes out orders of magnitude more of the inflationary sell pressure. Still, the proposal is simple, doesn't send yield to zero like that silly ethereum proposal, lands on tail inflation a couple of years quicker. Fair enoughl. The main value of the proposal for me is to box it off so we can talk about something else.

SGP-3, I would ABSTAIN on. I actually like the idea. It's the Solana version of EIP-1559, that had a rather simple escalating base fee design which added a consistent burn to ETH, just in time for the insane ape fest that was the 21/22 bull market. This gave us the "ultrasound money" meme, which I think the ethereans are rather locked into chasing the dragon on. The problem with that was that the deflationary moment that Ethereum had for a while became a proxy for revenue and activated the spreadsheet jockeys to get their DCF calculators out, creating a storm of bullish valuations. But then bear market time, the "revenue" went to zero. Uh oh. Actually, I think the 0 baseline for Ethereum is kind of ideal, it wipes off the inflation and runs the network flat. infinite game design. Still it's never enough, so moar burn needed. It's bullish for muh bags etc.

Well, maybe, as long as it doesn't make some transaction flows uneconomical, and have apps paying so much for TXs that it grinds down growth network wide. Still, more burn is good and actually think a mechanism that's more of an ape tax, which hits the most price insensitive market participants would be more ideal rather than high volume apps and atomic arbitrageurs.

So largely, I'm more of a not now, and maybe not this design. An SGP for "Increase the Burn", I'd be all in on. But, if we do something like this I think it should come late in the disinflationary curve and shouldn't be rushed in to. Multiple systemic economic changes at once isn't a great idea because they're so path dependent.

Anyway, decision time, please get your validators to turn out. Quorum is 50m SOL away.

[Vini B 「thecoding.dev」 @vinibarbosabr]

This quote summarizes the case for @Dashpay's GroveDB fairly well ↓

> "The real unlock isn’t that GroveDB answers complex queries faster. It’s that a light client can verify the answer without trusting the indexer that served it. That’s a much bigger primitive than Dash gets credit for."
-- @m477lander

Read my article below for the full picture!

[AlP3R_Cr1pT0 @alex_8672]

@toly @solana @solana_daily 🫣🤣👀

[Matt lander @m477lander]

Solana won my network poll, so I took the hint and spent some time looking through the latest network changes.

the obvious headline is SIMD-0525: the 350ms slot target is now live. Faster slots and the shorter blockhash window have already been covered. I wanted to see what this changes higher up the stack, so I went through the proposal, docs and public protocol code.

What I hadn't seen discussed much is what happens one layer above it:: the chain clock moved, while some app logic still reads time through the old 400ms assumption

The SIMD warns about this directly. anything measured in slots now covers less real time, and programs that treat slot distance as wall-clock time may need an update Static SDK constants also stay unchanged for now.

@switchboardxyz's Solana tutorial gave me the cleanest example:

`.max_age(30)` rejects data older than 30 slots and describes that as roughly 12 seconds..

At the 350ms target, those 30 slots are nominally 10.5 seconds. At 200ms, 6 seconds.

Same code. Same parameter. Different risk policy.

Switchboard is doing exactly what it says. If you meant 30 slots, the rule still does exactly what you asked. If you meant roughly 12 seconds, you don't have 12 seconds anymore.

I checked @kamino's public kLend code and found the same handoff. The path starts with Switchboard's last update slot, uses DEFAULT_MS_PER_SLOT to manufacture a timestamp, then checks that against a max age in seconds. the SDK constant is still 400ms, so against the 350ms target the nominal age comes out 14.3% higher.

At the 200ms target, it would read as 2x older than it really is. A 30-second policy would trip after roughly 15 seconds of wall time, without anyone changing the policy.

The deeper problem isn't the number 400. It's that a risk check silently translates between two clocks. And this is why "just use `Clock::unix_timestamp`" isn't the whole fix. the current time is in seconds, but this oracle update starts in slots Both sides of the check still need to speak the same clock

No exploit claim here. The bias is conservative: valid data can look stale sooner. This is an availability risk, not a direct value-extraction path. The important part is that the handoff exists in real code.

This is exactly why I keep banging on about the full execution path. The network can report the right slot. The oracle can report the right update. The check can run exactly as written. the final behavior still changes at the handoff between protocol time and real time.

This actually makes me like @Solana's staged rollout more. A faster clock is good infra, and every gate gives builders a real checkpoint to catch these assumptions before 200ms.

Before the next gate, grep for every `max_age`, staleness check, cooldown, retry and timeout expressed in slots. Did you mean slots or seconds?

@bw_solana, should apps stop converting between the two entirely: slots for protocol ordering, timestamped data for wall-clock policy? And if so, what should an oracle expose so apps never have to manufacture that timestamp themselves?

SIMD-0525:
https://t.co/GRZMxPDlti

Switchboard example:
https://t.co/HYhQE7X4Yw

SDK constant:
https://t.co/QtzmoQQItE

Public code example:
https://t.co/EFJ2bXV7NB
https://t.co/xm1gTjQEPc

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

One day, Optimus + Grok will provide incredible medical care to all the people of Earth

[Matt lander @m477lander]

x402 processed 75.4M transactions in the last 30 days. Agent wallets are here, and one question bothers me.

Caps and allowlists limit what an agent can do. They don’t prove the transaction matches the user’s intent.

Where should the final veto live?

https://t.co/wo6ehkrTCa

[AlP3R_Cr1pT0 @alex_8672]

@m477lander

[Matt lander @m477lander]

GM from Eva😺.
Can't tell if she's taking a shower or checking the water for bugs. either way, she's already doing more due diligence than half the builders in crypto lol

How's your morning going?

[Matt lander @m477lander]

The “theft” that triggered @Maya_Protocol’s anti-theft path never actually happened.

Two legitimate Trade Account outbounds had already gone through on L1, but MAYA failed to match them, marked them missing, and triggered compensation.

Then it got a bit awkward.

The slasher capped the amount against real balances. The subsidy path then picked up the raw amount again and credited 49.45M CACAO to the pool before the Reserve-to-Asgard transfer had succeeded. The Reserve held around 168K CACAO. The transfer failed. The pool still showed 49.45M.

So the anti-theft path booked compensation for a theft that never happened using money that wasn’t there.

A 100 CACAO + 100 ARB. LINK add then gave the attacker 99.93% of the pool units. That phantom balance was withdrawn as 48.87M CACAO and 98.82 LINK. @CertiKAlert put the exploit at ~$1.7M.

Not ideal for the bit of code meant to protect the pool from theft.

This is why I keep banging on about the whole execution path, not one check at a time. Every module can pass its own checks while the system as a whole ends up in a state that should be impossible.

Credit where it’s due: trading was halted, full recovery was promised publicly, and the v1.133 fix plus a regression test are in an open MR. That’s the right way to respond after a day like this.

So after v1.133, will the full compensation path get one final sanity check? If CACAO never reaches Asgard, the pool can’t account for it as if it did. Or will each module still trust the one before it?

MR: https://t.co/NqEEsLvNid

[Matt lander @m477lander]

@jessepollak @base interesting primitive, but “no liquidations” next to 100x is doing a lot of work here. users can still hit max loss very fast, the position just isn’t force-closed. how are you making that distinction obvious in the UX, @ForecastFDN?

[Matt lander @m477lander]

GM, builders and everyone who cares about crypto security 😺

Someone recently asked me why Eva is chewing on a BNB ball in my header lol

Well, it’s not there by accident.

I’ve been following BNB Chain for years, and it’s always been one of the ecosystems I’ve followed closely. But the closer I get to launching my project, the more I realize that you don’t choose a chain based on technology alone.

For me, it matters just as much whether the ecosystem actually listens to builders. How easy it is to reach the right people, talk about your product and simply start a normal conversation.

I still haven’t made a final decision on the chain. This isn’t just another token either. It’s a project I’ve been building for several years, so I can’t just pick a chain at random.

If you were choosing a blockchain for your project today, whether it’s a product, infrastructure, utility, a token or something else entirely, which one would you choose?

My current favorites are:

@BNBCHAIN / @cz_binance

@solana / @toly

@base / @jessepollak

@avax / @el33th4xor

Let’s vote below.

And definitely tell me in the comments which chain you picked and why.

Maybe this post will help me decide where the story of my project begins.

There’s a reason I picked these four. Each of them already has something my project needs, which makes the choice a lot harder than it probably looks.

[Matt lander @m477lander]

@Tanaka_L2 Adding a freeze button is the easy part. Getting the smart contract, issuer and courts to agree on what the token actually represents is the real product. Doing that without killing composability is the hard part.

[Matt lander @m477lander]

GM 😸🐾

[Matt lander @m477lander]

GM builders👨🏼‍💻
You wake up, open your eyes, and this sigma is staring at you. What’s your first thought?😸🐾

[Matt lander @m477lander]

GM builders 😼
I don’t even know how to describe this morning lmao. Spent all morning trying to wake Eva up - she finally woke up and immediately beat my ass…
Everything according to plan 😹
How’s your morning going?

[Matt lander @m477lander]

GM 🐾
wake up early enough and youre already tired by noon 😹 lmao
what are you building today?

[Matt lander @m477lander]

I’ll leave the first part of your comment unanswered for now lol😺

You’re right about the fangs, though. I never did explain why she has titanium fangs. I also never told the story of how Eva ended up living with me in the first place.

Eva is an African serval, a real predator. I never wanted a serval, and I don’t think people should buy wild cats just because they want something beautiful or unusual at home. A serval isn’t a toy. But things were different with Eva.

This was about six years ago. I was on a short trip, and people nearby had been looking for an escaped serval for several days. People from my country have local group chats wherever they move, and the escape was all over ours. We followed the search too, then decided to help and eventually got in touch with the owners.

That’s when we found out they were breeding exotic cats to sell. The escaped serval was an adult male, and we later learned he was Eva’s father. His escape brought way too much attention to the breeding operation. Inspections followed, along with questions about how the animals were being kept and bred. I won’t get into every detail. There was plenty of fucked-up shit going on.

The breeders ended up in immigration detention because they were foreigners. At the time, they still had an adult female serval and two very young kittens they were planning to sell. One of them was Eva.

The kittens had already been separated from their mother and bottle-fed way too early so they’d get used to people and be easier to sell. By then, both were completely dependent on humans.

The escaped male was eventually found. People who knew the breeders took him and the adult female, but the kittens were going to be put down. It all came down to a new law. People who already had these animals before the law took effect were allowed to keep them. Acquiring or keeping new ones was banned, and the kittens didn’t qualify for the exception.

At that point, I didn’t see much of a choice. The two kittens had already been born. They were alive, they’d done nothing wrong, and now they were going to be put down because of all this bullshit.

I took both of them somewhere it was legal to keep servals. I won’t get into exactly how I pulled that off. Let’s just say it took a hell of a lot of time and money. The stress was even worse.

I later gave the male kitten to someone who already had experience with animals like him. He couldn’t take both because two adult servals need a lot of space. The boy is still doing great, and Eva stayed with me.

The whole thing started with trying to keep them alive, so I named her Eva.

I realized pretty quickly that a serval is absolutely fucking nothing like a big house cat. She’s a predator who weighs over 14 kg, runs fast, can jump almost three meters straight up, and has the temperament to match. But you get attached to her almost instantly. And once you do, you’re responsible for an animal that depends on you for everything.

Eva also had health problems. Being bottle-fed so early took its toll, and as she grew, we discovered serious issues with her bone development. We spent a long time going from vet to vet and figuring out her diet. She went through exam after exam and slowly got better. Eventually she got stronger and grew up. For a while, everything was fine.

Then the dental problems started, especially with her fangs. Most vets suggested simply removing them. She could live a normal life without them, so medically, that was the easiest option. I didn’t like it.

Eva is still a serval and a predator. These problems went all the way back to the beginning of her life. Just removing her fangs now and calling it a day felt wrong. So I started looking for another option.

Eventually I found a veterinary dentist who takes on difficult cases. I had to wait several weeks because right before Eva, he’d been working on a bear’s teeth. An actual bear.

He examined Eva, and we decided to restore her teeth. She got ceramic crowns on the back teeth. The fangs were more complicated. A predator’s fangs have to withstand much more force, so ceramic wasn’t strong enough. We needed something tougher. That’s how Eva ended up with titanium fangs.

She uses them without any problems, including when she eats meat. No one replaced healthy teeth with metal ones just for looks. The damage was already there. Her fangs had to be rebuilt, and we went with titanium.

The engravings were my idea. When the fangs were being made, they asked if I wanted anything engraved on them. I figured that since they were going to be titanium anyway, I might as well add something personal.

One upper fang has a tiny crown engraved on it. The other has E.L. The E comes from her name, and the L from my last name.

Her teeth are fine now, and Eva is doing great too.

[Matt lander @m477lander]

Eva has never been just a pet to me.

She’s my best friend, my most loyal companion, and probably the creature I love most in this world. But over time, she became something else too. A symbol.

She somehow represents a lot of things that have always mattered to me. Even her name makes me think of life. But she’s also a predator. Protection, speed, agility, independence, always alert, and that focused stare that seems to notice everything around her.

A few years ago, I had a thought: what if one day she became the symbol of the biggest project of my life?

Not just a name or a cool mascot. I wanted the idea behind the project itself to stand for those same things.

As you can probably tell from the screenshot below, this didn’t start yesterday. Project EVA already existed back in 2024. There were early plans, job openings, people I was looking for, and something that, at the time, mostly existed in my head was slowly starting to take shape.

I’ll leave what happened after that out for now.

Maybe Project EVA will actually turn into something big and serious.

Or maybe there’s nothing serious about it at all. Just some weird idea from a developer who loves his serval way too much and decided to dedicate something to her.

Maybe it’s just for fun and one very long story.

Or maybe those of you who’ve been reading my posts for a while are starting to wonder about a few things.

Who knows.

For now, let’s just call it Project EVA.

But I’m genuinely curious. When you look at this screenshot, the name Project EVA, and this whole story, what’s the first thing that comes to mind?

What do you think something like this could turn into after a few years?

Something actually serious, or just one big idea that ends up going nowhere?

[Matt lander @m477lander]

gm.

Hypothetically…

If Eva ended up becoming the mascot of a crypto project…

What would you name it?