1005 Alcyon Dr Bellmawr NJ 08031
+1 484-446-2566
support@bmcpros.com
The announcement of the CETUS protocol on X that “attackers have stolen approximately $223 million from their liquidity encryption pool” has sparked the loudest governance controversy in SUI’s short-term history. The team wrote that “immediate action has been taken to lock down our contracts to prevent further theft of funds” and guaranteed that “the $162 million in compromise funds have been successfully suspended. … We are working with SUI Foundation and other ecosystem members, currently working with other ecosystem members on NextSep Solutions” and are expected to “all incident reports.”
Sui vulnerability after the outbreak of the crypto community
Those next solutions sparked a philosophical exchange. To get the stolen assets stuck on the chain, the verifier’s super worker agreed to ignore the upcoming transactions from three hacker-controlled addresses. Justin Bons, founder of cyber capital, believes that the behavior of the blacklist shows structural centralization: “Sui’s validators are checking the current TXS reviewing hackers! … Does this concentrate Sui? The short answer is yes? More importantly?” Why? “He cited only 114 validators and founders’ shares, claiming: “The Founder’ owns the majority of the supply, only 114 validators!” ”
Amogh Gupta of the SUI Foundation countered that the move was a legitimate action on distributed governance. “Just because validators agree on something, it doesn’t mean that their validators in other chains can (and) do the same thing. Your decentralization, Ethereum did something similar in 2023 when it blocked of ofac-approved deals, which he later wrote, is a grey thing. A day is not good, so there’s no controversy about whether it’s good or bad.”
Bons rejected the analogy. “You are misleading about the OFAC regulations in 2023: No ETH TX is under scrutiny because collusion is impossible (…), Sui’s distribution of power is so centralized that it is possible in the first place.” He drilled into the economics of tokens: “SUI claims that there is 10B supply of 10B, and 52% of “unallocated” by 2030. The problem is that more than 8B SUI has been fixed in fixed now! More than 84% of fixed supply is held by the founder!
Gupta replied that the number of validators was red herring. “NC (Nakamoto coefficient) is actually the only important indicator, and the number of validators is the most misleading and most easily game-producing metric when it comes to measuring decentralization. I could have 1,000 long-tail validators, but it’s useless if one owns more than 33% of the shares.” BONS Shoots Backward: “The fact that you really want to defend the “founder” control of 80% of the shares? 114 validators are too low and need to be at least over 1K to avoid this type of censorship.”
The dispute overflowed two crypto protagonists. fabda.eth (@fabdarice) argues that the freeze “again proved that there is only one blockchain suitable for protecting the world economy… there is only one Ethereum and stocks are ETH.” Crypto attorney Gabriel Shapiro responded to this view: “Remember that every smart contract chain except Ethereum is an enterprise blockchain; Sui Hacker switched from Sui to ETH because Ethereum is actually a censored scope.” Influential Crypto Ssebi summarized the reputational blow in more common language: “It looks like Sui was filming on her feet… Ignoring transactions and blocking transactions is something centralized databases can do.”
Voices inside the SUI ecosystem insist that the mechanism is an “emergency brake” rather than an acceptance of hierarchical control. Nefarii.Sui Nefarii.Sui, founder of Suimoveafrica, explained: “In rare large-scale vulnerabilities, like today’s CETUS protocol incident, SUI validators can unite and reach consensus to deny cryptocurrency transactions in specific malicious wallets. This is not an automatic and not a centralized effect. These are two key effects. Efficiency is required both times. He concluded: “SUI is decentralized; the network is secure; the asset recovery tool exists – prudence and consensus.” ”
Currently, this number is conducive to freezing: Cetus said “$162 million in trade-off funds have been successfully suspended”, while the attackers retained about $61 million to $61 million from Ethereum. Whether validator interventions will evolve into conventional protocol functionality or maintain a one-time response is a governance dilemma that SUI must address in the public eye.
At press time, the SUI traded at $3.61.
Featured Images created with dall.e, Charts for TradingView.com
Editing process For Bitcoin experts, focus on thorough research, accurate and impartial content. We adhere to strict procurement standards and each page is diligently evaluated by our top technical experts and experienced editorial team. This process ensures the integrity, relevance and value of our content to our readers.