Radiant Capital - REKT

2024 is off to a bright start...

Lending protool Radiant Capital lost 1900 ETH ($4.5M), yesterday, to a known bug affecting freshly-launched markets.

Radiant, a fork of Aave V2, operates on Arbitrum and BSC, with the hack occurring on the Arbitrum deployment’s new native USDC market.

It appears the attacker had been lying in wait, likely having identified the vulnerability in Aave-forks via updates to the Aave protocol itself.

The attacker’s address, as well as Discord screenshots, were posted to Twitter, raising the alarm. An official confirmation came later, adding:

No current funds are at risk.

So, just the $4.5M that had already been stolen, then?

Credit: Peckshield, Ancilia

The issue in forked Aave V2 code affects recently-launched (and therefore empty) markets.

A potential attacker has a brief window after launch to use a flash loan to manipulate the value of collateral, thanks to the combination of a rounding error and a totalSupply value of 0.

The exploiter wasted no time, deploying their attack contract just six seconds after the new market was activated.

The bug was previously mitigated in the original Aave protocol by simply including an initial deposit with the creation of new markets, ensuring they are never sitting empty.

Given the speed of the attack, the attacker had clearly prepared everything in advance whilst waiting for the proposal to add the market (which passed on December 25th) to be enacted.

Attacker’s address: 0x826d5f4d8084980366f975e10db6c4cf1f9dde6d

Attack contract: 0x39519c027b503f40867548fb0c890b11728faa8f

Attack tx 1: 0x1ce7e9a9…

Attack tx 2: 0x2af55638…

Attack tx 3: 0xc5c4bbdd…

The Radiant Team has sent an on-chain message to the hacker’s address (where funds remain), and appear confident that they’re dealing with a whitehat “for various reasons”.

Despite four audits, from OpenZeppelin, BlockSec, Peckshield and Zokyo, a constantly-evolving security landscape means updates must be made in a timely manner.

Especially when dealing with forked code.

We've discussed the risks of forks plenty of times, with multiple leaderboard entries down to vulnerabilities patched in one place before being exploited elsewhere.

When copy-pasting an established project, more eyes are focused on the original project’s larger TVL, providing an early warning system for bugs like these.

But if lessons aren’t learned, there’s little to be done.

Are any other forked protocols planning to launch new markets soon?

Are they up to date on the risks?

REKT, anonim yazarlar için halka açık bir platform olarak hizmet eder, REKT'te bulunan görüşler veya içerik için hiçbir sorumluluk kabul etmiyoruz.

bağış yap (ETH / ERC20): 0x3C5c2F4bCeC51a36494682f91Dbc6cA7c63B514C

sorumluluk reddi:

REKT, Web Sitemizde veya hizmetlerimizle bağlantılı olarak web sitemizin ANON yazarı veya REKT tarafından gönderilen, yayınlanan veya neden olunan hiçbir içerikten hiçbir şekilde sorumlu veya yükümlü değildir. Anon yazarın davranışları ve gönderileri için kurallar sağlamamıza rağmen, onun web sitemizde veya hizmetlerimizde yayınladığı, ilettiği veya paylaştığı şeylerden sorumlu değiliz veya web sitemizde ve hizmetlerimizde karşılaşabileceğiniz herhangi bir saldırgan, uygunsuz, müstehcen, yasa dışı veya başka şekilde sakıncalı olan içerikten sorumlu değiliz. REKT, Web Sitemizin veya Hizmetlerimizin herhangi bir kullanıcısının çevrimiçi veya çevrimdışı davranışlarından sorumlu değildir.