Kamoulox

1.6K posts

Kamoulox banner
Kamoulox

Kamoulox

@Lylo69

Katılım Ekim 2013
1.3K Takip Edilen90 Takipçiler
Mid
Mid@Elmidou·
@catwychan Hey @ResolvLabs is this also a case where you want to take from RLP and give to the exploiter?
English
1
0
1
50
Catherine is Solving
Catherine is Solving@catwychan·
Can’t believe still seeing resolv USR exploits even now. Silo finance saw ~$400k USDC drained via wstUSR market on arbitrum, yesterday. - The exploit seem to be only possible in silo implementation (morpho fork). - In silo’s version, TotalAsset() counts both collateral + supply. The collateral value is priced via the oracle. - In this case, since the vault share accounts for the collateral, attackers can inflate NAV by ~9x by donating cheap collateral — wstUSR ($0.12 on DEX but $1.13 via the vault oracle) — and then redeem vault shares to extract real value from the vault’s other liquid markets. - Whereas standard Metamorpho’s TotalAsset() only counts for the vault’s supply positions. Takeaways: Not all morpho forks are created the same. But how are users supposed to know. We are all f***ed.
YAM 🌱@yieldsandmore

Earlier today, ~392k USDC from @SiloFinance's managed soUSDC vault on Arbitrum was forcibly allocated into the wstUSR/USDC market, leaving bad debt. wstUSR was trading at ~$0.12 onchain, but the Silo market's oracle priced it at 1 wstUSR = 1.1329 USDC. Anyone who bought wstUSR cheaply could use it as collateral worth ~10x its real value. The exploiter called deposit() on the wstUSR market directly, donating the shares to soUSDC. The supply cap controlling how much soUSDC can actively allocate to this market was 0, but that cap only governs the vault's own outbound deposits. It does nothing to stop external parties from crediting positions to the vault. Once those shares landed in soUSDC's balance, totalAssets() counted them. It iterates every market in the withdrawal queue and reads the vault's actual share balance in each one, with no check on whether the position was voluntarily entered. Combined with the oracle gap, each attack loop worked like this: 1. Flash-loan USDC. 2. Deposit the bulk of USDC to soUSDC, which routes it to an existing market and mints soUSDC shares to the attacker. 3. Deposit a small amount of USDC to the wstUSR market directly, donate the shares to soUSDC. 4. Borrow that USDC back using cheap wstUSR as collateral at the inflated oracle price. 5. Redeem the soUSDC shares. soUSDC's totalAssets() now includes the gifted position, so the attacker's shares are worth more than when they deposited. Combined with the borrow proceeds, this covers the flashloan repayment. 6. Walk away with a small profit. wstUSR stays locked as collateral permanently. Each loop was limited by how much wstUSR the attacker had, so between loops they kept buying more on the open market. That pressure drove wstUSR from ~$0.12 to ~$0.75. The loop ran 32 times over ~75 minutes. Silo's allocator noticed and called reallocate() to move the remaining 154k to an idle holding vault. It didn't help. The idle vault was in soUSDC's withdrawal queue. Each flashloan loop inflated soUSDC's book value by depositing to the wstUSR market, but that market had nothing liquid to withdraw since it was immediately borrowed out. So soUSDC pulled the shortfall from the idle vault every single time. 154k gone in 40 seconds across 20 transactions. soUSDC depositors are now exposed to ~392k of undercollateralised debt at 100% utilisation. What could Silo have done? The oracle used by the wstUSR market is hardcoded as immutable in the SiloConfig contract. The only option available was removing the wstUSR market from soUSDC's withdrawal queue before anyone exploited it. That process requires three steps, each behind the vault's 48h timelock: enable the market with a nominal cap, set the cap back to 0, submit removal and wait for it to finalise. Six days total. They didn't start it. What can they do now? They can still run that same six-day process. It won't recover the 392k, but it prevents a repeat. They should also remove the soUSDC vault from the UI to prevent new deposits. SiloVault is forked from @Morpho's MetaMorpho contract (Silo's own source code says `Forked with gratitude from Morpho Labs`). Any MetaMorpho/SiloVault-style vault that (1) counts externally credited market balances in totalAssets(), (2) leaves the toxic market in the withdraw queue, and (3) relies on a stale or structurally incomplete pricing path can be exposed to this same class of attack. Example exploit tx: arbiscan.io/tx/0xd354389e6… Exploiter: debank.com/profile/0x8170… soUSDC Vault: v2.silo.finance/vaults/arbitru… wstUSR market: v2.silo.finance/markets/arbitr… Failed rescue tx: arbiscan.io/tx/0x3235decc8… Oracle: #readContract" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">arbiscan.io/address/0x6BC7…

English
3
0
5
2.7K
Kamoulox
Kamoulox@Lylo69·
@HubertX13 @ResolvLabs The collateral for RLP is intact and the terms are not clear about an issue related to offchain hack. Resolv risks litigations if they misuse the RLP collateral.
English
1
0
1
27
Hubirb 🐘👀
Hubirb 🐘👀@HubertX13·
After gathering thoughts from various parties at ETHCC, here is my take on the options available to @ResolvLabs regarding their recent $USR hack. For me it’s very clear, there are two paths going forward: 1/ Resolv reduces $RLP value by the loss in collateral pool and uses treasury funds to partially compensate Fluid and Gauntlet for their USR bad debt. In this case, pretty much no end user will loose anything since fluid has repaid already, and anyway both gauntlet and fluid committed to repay right after the hack so it’s their word on the line. After that, new USR token and Resolv is back in business. 2/ Resolv repays fluid’s and gauntlet’s USR bad debts. RLP takes a significant hit, this creates an additional few millions of bad debt increasing even more the whole. Fluid is happy as they can replenish their treasury. Gauntlet is half happy half rekt because of the RLP bad debt generated. Tons of end users get rekt. Resolv then shut down as nobody will ever allocate funds to RLP again. Probably possible to get an exit door at Fluid. As an investor in Resolv, I would very much prefer if the team would decide to go the option 1 route (which is btw the most solid one from a legal standpoint). Hopefully there is a path towards rebuilding a successful Resolv.
English
3
6
21
3.6K
Kamoulox
Kamoulox@Lylo69·
@Hexen1337 @ResolvLabs Resolv will never recover after this disastrous crisis management and the blatant lack of professionalism in USR minting management
English
0
0
1
56
Kamoulox
Kamoulox@Lylo69·
@Elmidou @ResolvLabs @0x1lucas They’ll wait until the last second to claim RLP was de facto used to cover debt caused by their own off-chain security flaws. It's a scandal.
English
0
0
1
48
Kamoulox
Kamoulox@Lylo69·
@Iv4n_Ko @ResolvLabs Resolv failed by prioritizing some victims over a unified plan. This leaves no room for debate and forces RLP holders to absorb the debt. Given the ambiguous terms and off-chain error, it’s pure unprofessionalism.
English
0
0
2
58
IvanKo
IvanKo@Iv4n_Ko·
@Lylo69 @ResolvLabs It's not about unprofessionalism, laziness or lack of desire to find the solution as quickly as possible. We push forward to find a balanced path forward with all the parties involved, and it takes coordination and time, not only hard effort.
English
1
0
1
53
Nicolas
Nicolas@nb4ld·
C'est un grand jour pour ma carrière. La bâtonnière ignore si j'ai des compétences en droit. J'ai donc décidé d'en avoir. À bientôt ! 🚀
Nicolas tweet media
Français
18
4
120
93.2K
Finn
Finn@MischiefCS2·
VRS Breaking News 🇪🇺 FaZe clan have been eliminated from major contention. (without a change in schedule) From Budapest Major finalists to not qualifying to the following major. They had so much LANW cap space, but did not have the schedule to capitalise on it and had no safety net.
English
35
34
1.5K
200.3K
Mid
Mid@Elmidou·
@0xDataWolf The fine print says RLP covers the collateral when it is generating yield. RLP doesn’t cover DeFi markets of USR in the case of an infinite mint. It also doesn’t cover defi protocols or defi markets impacted by the USR exploit.
English
1
0
7
135
IvanKo
IvanKo@Iv4n_Ko·
@upsidan We are still working on the action plan with regards to RLP redemptions and will share updates when they are available
English
1
0
3
726
IvanKo
IvanKo@Iv4n_Ko·
Sharing a bit broader highlight of the Resolv security incident
English
12
3
60
34.3K
Mid
Mid@Elmidou·
@letsgetonchain @ResolvLabs By newly minted USR you mean illicit USR? How does it make sense to cover illicit USR? Should they also hand a check to the exploiter? I hear a curator actually did just that and now wants to get paid with RLP collateral?! How does this make any sense?
English
2
0
3
326
Mid
Mid@Elmidou·
It’s been 8 days that @ResolvLabs has closed RLP redemptions. It is unclear why it is still paused. Why are RLP redemptions still blocked?
English
6
5
61
10.9K
Mid
Mid@Elmidou·
RLP’s collateral is intact. Is someone else claiming that collateral? The terms are clear: DeFi markets and protocols do not have any right to RLP’s collateral.
English
2
0
13
954
Mid
Mid@Elmidou·
RLP collateral backs delta-neutral yield and covers losses WITHIN those strategies, such as negative funding or a CEX blowout. RLP only covers losses to the Reserv Collateral Pool, which is intact. RLP collateral CANNOT cover the USR exploit. That was never in the terms. Framing RLP as “junior tranche to the USR ecosystem” is a scheme to strip RLP holders of their assets and redirect them to third parties.
English
12
8
73
7.4K
Mamo
Mamo@mamo·
Introducing Mamo, your personal finance companion. 🌱 Earn 30% APR on USDC when you deposit through @baseapp. We’re sharing $10,000 in rewards over 4 weeks. Boosted by @Base. Let your money grow quietly in the background.
Mamo tweet media
English
25
18
133
21.2K
Kamoulox
Kamoulox@Lylo69·
@euKuCoin hello ! Impossible for me to sign up on your platform, trying from France for 2 weeks now. Need help
English
0
0
0
10
Grégory Raymond 🐳
Grégory Raymond 🐳@gregory_raymond·
🟥 Info @TheBigWhale_ Alors que la vague d'agressions de détenteurs de cryptos s'accélère, la start-up @Get_Waltio a été victime de plusieurs intrusions dans son système. Nous sommes en mesure de révéler qu'une d'entre elles, intervenue au 1er trimestre 2025, n'a jamais été communiquée. Elle a également permis aux hackers de dérober un peu plus de 6 BTC. Selon nos informations, son fichier client alimente activement des groupes criminels. Chaque utilisateur de ce service est actuellement à risque. Particulièrement ceux dont le compte Waltio établit un important patrimoine crypto. Ces derniers sont vivement incités à se rapprocher de la police ou la gendarmerie. [Compte tenu du contexte, nous avons mis cette investigation en accès libre 🔓] thebigwhale.io/article/exclus…
Français
61
173
646
359.7K
KRATOS
KRATOS@camerounBoy2·
#MARSEN Diaz loupe pour sauver l’image du Maroc car la triche était trop grosse ? Ou il a du coeur et veut un match juste
Français
5
0
1
974