Just Bad Luck?

Hidden backdoors don't get a knock before entering.

Kinto's $K token got hijacked through a proxy exploit that let attackers mint 110k tokens, drain $1.55 million from Uniswap and Morpho pools, and nuked the price by almost 95%.

The team points fingers at sophisticated hackers exploiting old OpenZeppelin code - not their pristine contracts or their freshly unlocked insider allocations.

Pure technical malfunction, they swear. Just terrible timing that the exploit hit days after token unlocks began.

Just awful luck that their founder's previous project also collapsed under similar circumstances.

Just an unfortunate coincidence that recovery plans promise snapshot-based redemption while the original attackers might still qualify for the new token distribution.

When lightning strikes twice in the same place, do you blame the weather - or start looking for the lightning rod?

Clean bridges. Secure infrastructure. Third-party code gone wrong.

But Kinto still lost $1.55 million, tanked their token by almost 95%, and left their community wondering: hack, heist, or just another DeFi ritual where founders profit, victims cope, and post-mortems polish the rubble?

Ramon Recuero's Kinto positioned itself as Ethereum's golden road for regulated finance.

Their Arbitrum-deployed $K token launched with professional swagger - exchange listings, institutional backing, and all the trappings of legitimate infrastructure.

Until July 10th, when mathematical certainty met human suspicion in the most uncomfortable way possible.

A hidden proxy backdoor let attackers mint 110K $K tokens. They drained every available pool, crashing the price from $7.68 to $0.50 within 24 hours.

The attackers remain conveniently anonymous, their wallets potentially eligible for the upcoming v2 token distribution.

The team's initial response was suspiciously vague: "Kinto community. We are looking into the situation ourselves and with third parties (Hypernative, Seal 911) - as soon as we have a clear picture of what has happened we will make an announcement."

But here's where technical exploits get messy - timing rarely tells the whole story, and Kinto's calendar was about to become evidence.

What are the odds that sophisticated hackers choose the exact moment when insiders can finally cash out?

The Perfect Storm

July 1st: Kinto's investor allocations began unlocking. 2.25 million $K tokens suddenly became liquid - a sum that dwarfed the project's entire market cap.

July 10th: The exploit hit.

Nine days. That's the gap between insider freedom and system failure.

Community sleuth Anon Vee had been tracking this timeline for months, warning followers about the suspicious tokenomics. His April prediction aged like fine wine: "The real reason behind delayed listing was to reduce the time investors had to wait before their allocation gets unlocked."

Here's where Ramon got creative with calendar math. Standard vesting locks tokens for a full year minimum.

But what if you launch the token, then simply don't let anyone trade it for nine months?

Technically, you've honored the one-year commitment - June 2024 to March 2025.

Legally bulletproof. Ethically questionable.

$K existed in regulatory limbo for nine months, ticking down the vesting clock while markets remained frozen.

Smart contracts don't care about trading availability - they only count block timestamps.

When the exploit drained liquidity pools, those freshly unlocked tokens weren't sitting in some theoretical vault - they were live ammunition in a loaded market.

How does a team get hit by catastrophic failure just days after their biggest holders gain selling power?

The Ghost in the Machine

Ramon Recuero's explanation arrived wrapped in technical jargon thick enough to choke a blockchain explorer.

"Today, we got hacked by a state actor. They upgraded the implementation of the K token on Arbitrum and used it to mint fake K tokens that they dumped immediately."

State actor. Because nothing says "we're victims too" like blaming nation-state hackers for your token's collapse.

The exploit itself was real enough - a sophisticated backdoor buried in ERC-1967 proxy contracts, a widely-used but vulnerable proxy pattern that let attackers mint unlimited tokens while blockchain explorers showed nothing suspicious.

Security researchers at Venn Network had been tracking this vulnerability for months, playing a high-stakes game of whack-a-mole across thousands of vulnerable contracts.

Behind closed doors, security researchers raced to defuse the ticking timebomb.

Teams like Venn, Dedaub, and SEAL 911 quietly coordinated with vulnerable protocols, reaching out directly or through backchannels to help patch the proxy flaw before it could be exploited.

Some projects reconfigured contracts. Others pulled funds. A few narrowly escaped disaster.

Kinto slipped between the cracks.

According to Ramon's timeline, the disclosure happened July 9th at 20:17 UTC. The attack came July 10th at 08:40 UTC.

Twelve hours. Just enough time to panic - not enough to patch.

But here's where the technical narrative gets interesting: the attackers minted exactly 110,000 $K tokens before draining the pools.

Not 100,000. Not 150,000. Exactly 110,000 - a suspiciously round number that suggests either remarkable restraint or intimate knowledge of the liquidity available.

Professional hackers don't usually stop at "just enough." They grab everything and sort it out later.

Was this surgical precision the mark of sophisticated attackers - or someone who knew exactly how much the market could absorb?

Babylon’s Shadow

Ramon Recuero's explanation might have carried more weight if he wasn't already standing in the wreckage of his previous venture.

Babylon Finance launched in 2021 with revolutionary promise: democratized asset management through community-driven investment strategies.

Professional-grade portfolio management for retail investors. Hedge funds for the people, powered by smart contracts and good intentions.

$200 million FDV at peak. $100,000 by 2022. A 99.95% collapse that vaporized investor capital faster than a leveraged long in a bear market.

Ramon's Babylon autopsy read like a greatest hits album of crypto excuses: whales dumping, hackers exploiting, macro headwinds beyond anyone's control.

External forces. Market manipulation. Everything except the uncomfortable truth that maybe the fundamentals were screwed from day one.

Kinto emerged in 2024 wearing Babylon's clothes with fresh tailoring. Smart wallets instead of smart portfolios. Compliance theater instead of democratized finance. Same institutional cheerleaders, same revolutionary rhetoric, same founder promising this time would be different.

Revolutionary infrastructure has a way of revolving around the same people.

Different wrapper, identical pattern.

Community detective Anon Vee connected the dots months before the exploit.

Both projects shared an uncanny ability to time their collapses perfectly with market stress. Both blamed external forces for internal failures.

Both left communities asking the same uncomfortable questions about coincidence versus coordination.

When founders recycle their failures into fresh fundraising rounds, how many second chances does the market owe them?

Help Us Help You

Ramon's damage control playbook opened to a familiar chapter: promise everything, deliver nothing, buy time with technical theater.

"We're raising a recovery fund," he announced 3 days after the exploit. "Bootstrapping fresh liquidity isn't free. If you believe in Kinto's mission - safer, compliant DeFi - consider helping."

Consider helping. The audacity was breathtaking.

Not "we're making victims whole with our own funds." Not "we're taking responsibility for the security failure." Just a polite request for donations to clean up the mess.

The recovery plan sounded reasonable enough on paper: snapshot all balances before the hack, create a new K token on Arbitrum with those balances, fundraise to restore the $1.4M lost in Uniswap liquidity and Morpho vault balances.

But buried in the fine print was a poison pill that made the whole scheme suspect.

Those mysterious attackers who minted 110,000 fake tokens? No mention of the wallets blacklisted.

Under Kinto's generous recovery terms, they'd be eligible for brand new v2 tokens based on their snapshot balances - effectively letting them double-dip on the proceeds of their own exploit.

Twitter user Rosla Ahmed spelled it out: "If the $K exploit was internal, the team made bank: Minted fake tokens to drain $1.5M from LPs, likely bought the dip with fresh wallets, will get v2 $K in recovery plan, could even profit from the recovery fund. Exploit the system, control the narrative, profit twice."

The math was elegant. The optics were toxic.

Meanwhile, legitimate users who lost funds in the exploit would get their tokens back - but only if Ramon successfully raised enough money from "partners and existing investors" to make everyone whole.

The full technical post-mortem later revealed the sophisticated nature of the exploit, but questions about timing and beneficiaries remained unanswered.

No guarantees. No timeline. No accountability.

Just another crowdfunded bailout for another failed founder's latest venture.

When the recovery plan requires victims to fund their own rescue, who's really being saved?

Maybe it was a sophisticated proxy backdoor that caught everyone off guard.

Maybe the timing was pure coincidence - hackers striking at the worst possible moment.

Maybe it was state actors, maybe we will see the proof one day.

Maybe Ramon Recuero is just unlucky as hell, destined to watch his projects implode while he stands there holding the bag.

Or maybe we're watching the same movie with different actors, where insider unlocks precede convenient catastrophes and recovery funds become the final act of extraction.

The blockchain doesn't lie about transaction timestamps. The proxy exploit was real.

The vulnerability was genuinely sophisticated. But technical truth and human intent aren't mutually exclusive - the best cons hide behind legitimate complexity.

When insiders unlock millions in tokens days before a "hack," when recovery plans benefit potential attackers, when the same founder's previous project collapsed under similar circumstances - intent becomes optional.

Outcome is everything.

$K v2 promises a fresh start, clean contracts, and restored faith. But promises are just promises until they're written in code that actually works.

Until then, crypto's golden rule remains unchanged: users pay, founders profit, and the cycle spins on.

Just bad luck?

Or just another day in DeFi, where the house always wins and the only thing truly decentralized is the blame?

REKT serves as a public platform for anonymous authors, we take no responsibility for the views or content hosted on REKT.

donate (ETH / ERC20): 0x3C5c2F4bCeC51a36494682f91Dbc6cA7c63B514C

disclaimer:

REKT is not responsible or liable in any manner for any Content posted on our Website or in connection with our Services, whether posted or caused by ANON Author of our Website, or by REKT. Although we provide rules for Anon Author conduct and postings, we do not control and are not responsible for what Anon Author post, transmit or share on our Website or Services, and are not responsible for any offensive, inappropriate, obscene, unlawful or otherwise objectionable content you may encounter on our Website or Services. REKT is not responsible for the conduct, whether online or offline, of any user of our Website or Services.