š¤ UPD: $50M From the Bitget Hack Hit NEAR Intents š Remember the $351.6M Bitget hack? Some of the stolen crypto is now testing an uncomfortable question for DeFi: what exactly does āpermissionlessā mean when a protocol can still freeze your funds? š More than $50M linked to the Bitget hack was reportedly routed toward NEAR Intents. Its SHIELD system blocked most of those attempts during the quote stage, while another $503K was frozen during execution. Around $166K still made it through. š And that triggered a debate. NEAR Intents describes itself as permissionless, but its architecture allows specific governance addresses to block accounts and even pause swaps and withdrawals entirely. š NEAR Intents responded with a simple argument: āpermissionless does not mean neutral.ā In other words, anyone may be able to access the protocol ā but that doesnāt necessarily mean the protocol has to process every transaction. š Compare that with THORChain, which reportedly refused to selectively block hacker-linked funds after the same Bitget incident, pointing specifically to its permissionless architecture. š Important distinction: NEAR Intents is a separate protocol built on top of NEAR. These controls exist at the Intents layer and do not mean the NEAR blockchain itself can selectively freeze funds. š The Bitget hack is turning into more than a $352M security incident. Now itās exposing where different DeFi protocols draw the line between permissionless infrastructure and intervention.
Open in Telegram
š¤ UPD: $50M From the Bitget Hack Hit NEAR Intents
Views263ā94%vs avg
Forwards0
Reactions6
Commentsā
Reactions
- ā¤5
- šÆ1
More from CRYPTO ROAST
- 01Views7.83KForwards1Reactions415Commentsā
- 02Views7.29KForwards1Reactions404Commentsā
- 03Views7.16KForwards1Reactions421Commentsā
- 04Views7.05KForwards2Reactions396Commentsā
- 05Views6.86KForwards1Reactions352Commentsā