DeFi project Safemoon has announced that its liquidity pool has been compromised, according to a statement on its official Twitter handle.
So far, the amount of funds stolen due to the exploit remains unknown.
Liquidity Pool Compromised
Safemoon stated that it is taking steps to resolve the matter. However, details around the issue remain sketchy at best.
“We are taking swift action in an attempt to resolve the issue as soon as possible. Follow here for updates. Thank you for your support as we work to address this situation.”
CEO John Karony retweeted the same statement but has not commented further. Safepool is a Metaverse, blockchain, NFT, and Web 3.0 building and innovation ecosystem. However, the company has been at the center of several controversies since its launch in March 2021.
The Bug In Question
While Safemoon has remained mum about the incident, several others have commented on the developments. Security firm PeckShield has stated that an update to a contract introduced a burn bug that allowed anyone to destroy tokens. PeckShield stated that the upgrade looked to be initiated by a deployer contract, making it possible that there was an admin key leak. However, the firm could not state how much crypto, if any, has been compromised.
“Hi @safemoon, The upgrade, with the exploited public burn bug, was initiated by the official SafeMoon: Deployer. (Admin key leak?).”
Meanwhile, Web 3.0 developer DeFi mark stated that SafeMoon was hacked for $8.9 million, adding that he was able to identify an obvious exploit. The public burn function allows users to burn tokens from any other address. The attacker exploited this function to remove SFM tokens from the SafeMoon WBNB Liquidity Pool, artificially inflating the price of the native token.
Attacker Reaches Out
Following the news of the exploit, the protocol’s native SFM token tanked, dropping as much as 30%. However, barely hours after the exploit, the attackers in question responded to a message in the transaction thread, seemingly suggesting that they were willing to return the funds to Safemoon, which indeed they did. Data from
Go to Source to See Full Article
Author: Amara Khatri