0xKimos ⛏️

$NAT UNDER ATTACK 🚨 Exploit narratives. Miner tension. Bad incentives. A lot of noise. We break down what’s actually happening and why this moment could matter more than people realize. How NAT Just Experienced Its Coming Of Age Moment! Miner Poisoning Explained! Four mining pools, @Braiins, SEC Pool, Ultimate Pool, and Mining Squared, all adopted the $NAT token within the same few hours, which initially felt like a major win. But as we dug deeper, something strange became clear: all four of these pools share a connection to @AntPoolofficial, the original $NAT mover. A research article by Bitcoin developer B10C on Bitcoin mining centralization in 2025 confirmed it, @Braiins, @CloverPool_com, @AntPoolofficial, @ultimus_pool, and others are all listed together as "Antpool and friends." The fact that only these four affiliated pools adopted $NAT simultaneously, while others did not, made us pause. The situation escalated quickly. We noticed that all four pools sent their $NAT tokens to a single wallet address, which is a major red flag. Independent mining entities don't typically consolidate to one address unless something coordinated,or something wrong, is happening. Sure enough, that address proceeded to dump all the $NAT at roughly a 50% discount. It was absorbed almost instantly by people who understood the opportunity. This was not a legitimate adoption, it was a scam exploiting a real vulnerability in the protocol. The attack vector is what's known as transfer poisoning. Antpool and its affiliated pools use a shared technology stack that automatically signs all UTXO outputs. A sophisticated attacker sent a transfer inscription to those pool addresses. Because the dispatcher automatically processes UTXO outputs and a token send encodes the recipient address of the attacker, the transfer was completed without any manual confirmation. @FoundryServices was also targeted, but because Foundry does not auto-sign all UTXO outputs the same way, the attack failed there, validating exactly where the vulnerability lived. @rarity_garden and the @natgmi development team responded fast. A mandatory protocol update was implemented, requiring miners to opt into an unlocking step before they can transfer $NAT, essentially inscribing an intent to their own address first. This opt-in inscription prevents transfer poisoning because attackers can no longer trigger an automatic send. It's a clean, elegant fix. This kind of event has a historical precedent. Bitcoin itself had a critical overflow bug in August 2010, barely a year after launch, where a hacker generated 184 billion BTC in a single transaction. Satoshi and developers patched it within five hours. @ethereum had the DAO hack. These events aren't the end of a protocol; they're stress tests that force improvements and build long-term resilience. The fact that NAT's response was equally swift is a positive signal, not a catastrophe. The bigger takeaway here is awareness. The only real long-term defense is making sure every Bitcoin miner knows about NAT. Pools like @ViaBTC , @f2pool, and @SpiderPool_com were not compromised because they operate outside the Antpool technology stack, but that's not the point. If Antpool is already moving and selling NAT rewards, their customers, the miners using their infrastructure, deserve to know this is happening and how to protect themselves. Centralization in mining isn't just a philosophical concern; it creates systemic exploitable surfaces. And as the Bitcoin security budget conversation grows louder, NAT's role in solving that problem will matter more, not less. Pay attention to the organic ones.

Bitcoin's price has to double every 4 years just to maintain today's security level. Can it double forever? We explain why $NAT exists and why miners are already earning it. Full video 👇 Why NAT Is Quietly Climbing To #1 Bitcoin Token Status! Last Crypto To Survive The Winter! @natgmi is back in the spotlight. We break down why the conversation around Bitcoin’s long-term security model is becoming harder to ignore. As we dig into the recent surge in attention around $NAT, why people suddenly care when price action returns, and how that ties into a deeper structural issue inside Bitcoin itself. The discussion starts with the broader state of crypto culture, using the recent @VanityFair feature and @opensea token controversy as examples of how disconnected the industry has become from its original ideals. From delayed token launches to incentive schemes dressed up as community participation, the episode contrasts the speculative side of crypto with the kind of infrastructure-level problems that actually matter. From there, the focus shifts to Bitcoin mining, the halving cycle, and the security budget problem. As we explain why miner revenue is directly tied to Bitcoin’s security, why relying on price appreciation alone becomes less realistic over time, and how AI is now emerging as a serious competitor for the same energy resources miners depend on. We also challenge the common argument that difficulty adjustment solves everything, arguing that network survival is not the same as preserving meaningful security and decentralization. That is where $NAT comes in. NAT is a second subsidy for Bitcoin, born directly from Bitcoin block data, with no team allocation, no VC supply, and no traditional token-launch structure. We explain why miners already receiving NAT may eventually view it as a meaningful economic layer, and why growing miner participation, community-led liquidity, and multi-chain expansion are fueling stronger interest in the token. The conversation also covers NAT’s recent momentum, including signs of miner integration, expanding access across @Ethereum, @Solana, and now @Binance Smart Chain, and how its market position compares to other major Bitcoin-derived tokens. Rather than being driven by pure hype, the argument here is that @natgmi stands out because it is tied to a real problem, a real mechanism, and a part of the crypto stack that everything else ultimately depends on. What comes through most clearly is that this is not just a conversation about another token. It is really a conversation about whether Bitcoin can preserve the thing that gives it value in the first place, and whether the market is willing to look seriously at a solution before the pressure becomes impossible to ignore. The broader view in this episode is that crypto has spent years rewarding narratives, speculation, and short-term extraction, while ignoring foundational questions that may matter much more over the next decade. NAT is presented here as one of the few ideas in the space that feels connected to first principles, and whether people agree or not, it forces a discussion that Bitcoin cannot avoid forever.