@aave $wrsETH exposure on each chain:
Arbitrum: $153m $wrsETH (12.2% of total market)
Mantle: $116m $wrsETH (10.9% of total market)
Base: $71.2m $wrsETH (7.1% of total market)
Ink: $21m $wrsETH (4.2% of total market)
linea: $1.4m $wrsETH (1.8% of total market)
@DefiIgnas any vault with exposure at @beefyfinance was pulled from the lending platforms into the strategy contracts for users to withdraw about an hr ago so all good here
How is infamous FnF Snipers @yx aka shatter.sol linked to @StreamDefi? This is wild 🧵
shatter.sol has sent & received millions to a solana wallet E3VR. Yesterday on Nov 6th, E3VR bridged 150k USDC via @MayanFinance to shatter.eth on ethereum.
shatter.eth has multiple links to stream as explained in the tweets below 👇
important shitshow;
elixir saying that the deusd collateralized by stream on money markets is effectively siloed and claims dependent on stream repaying (ofc they won't)
the issue is, stream borrowed money from other ppl against this deusd - so the collateral that people lent against is now worth nothing.
why did elixir issue as an erc20 if 1 deusd =/= 1 deusd?
curators and lenders now have to check WHO owns the collateral being supplied to permissionless money markets, rather than just what it is? how can they set ltvs and risk params with this in mind? why are we building defi again if we're going to have to just do KYC lending in the end?
(btw, @0xlawlol the lying subhuman scumbag was bridging funds in the final few days with alternate receiver address to obfuscate that it was him max borrowing - but ofc he didn't know it was about to go under right!? didn't know about the hole? fucking cunt caught lying again!)
finally - elixir's POV is that curators and lenders should have done their DD on whose collateral they were lending against in a permissionless money market! but they shouldn't have done the same DD when lending $70m to law themselves point blank? @0xPhilip straight to jail, esp. given team linked wallets were max redeeming deUSD just before your announcement.
1st time BTC hits $100k, ETH is $4k
2nd: BTC $100k, ETH $3.9k
3rd: BTC $100k, ETH $3.7k
4th: BTC $100k, ETH $3.4k
5th: BTC $100k, ETH $3k
6th: BTC $100k, ETH $2.7k
7th: BTC $100k, ETH $2k
8th: BTC $100k, ETH $2.2k
9th: BTC $100k, ETH $2.2k
10th: BTC $100k, ETH $3.2k
Shibarium was attacked yesterday & the bridge drained for nearly $3m. Here's how it happened👇
1/ Ryoshi Labs' validator (and perhaps others) were compromised or malicious from the start. They proposed a fraudulent checkpoint on Heimdall (Shibarium's consensus engine).
2/ Before the attack, Shibarium consensus was secured by ~15m staked BONE ($7m).
3/ The Ryoshi Labs validator 0x0752 submitted a fraudulent checkpoint.
👉 10/12 validators signed it as valid.
👉 These validators controlled ~40% of the weighted stake with ~6.5m BONE.
👉 The remaining 2 validators with 60% stake didn't sign it.
4/ Normally this checkpoint would be rejected on the Ethereum side, as this requires a >2/3 consensus.
5/ The attacker flash-loaned 6.4m BONE, delegating it to the Ryoshi Labs validator.
👉 Total stake became ~19.7m BONE
👉 Now those 10 validators that signed had just over 66% stake.
6/ This allowed a 2/3 attack, giving those validators the power to finalize any state they wanted on Ethereum.
At this point Shibarium was completely compromised.
7/ With consensus hijacked, all that was left to do was to drain the bridge.
8/ Finally, a portion of the stolen funds were used to repay the flashloan.
10/12 validators signing the fraudulent checkpoint is very strange and raises A LOT of questions
1st time BTC hits $100k, ETH is $4k
2nd: BTC $100k, ETH $3.9k
3rd: BTC $100k, ETH $3.7k
4th: BTC $100k, ETH $3.4k
5th: BTC $100k, ETH $3k
6th: BTC $100k, ETH $2.7k
7th: BTC $100k, ETH $2k
8th: BTC $100k, ETH $2.2k
9th: BTC $100k, ETH $2.2k
Is the trend finally reversing? 🥺
The wait is over. Bitcoin-Native DeFi has entered the chat. 🦋
We're integrating @MorphoLabs to unlock Bitcoin-backed lending and borrowing on @use_corn
🧵👇