Digital Asset
Intelligence

Hacked Event Broadcast

Live source archive

Verified blockchain security incidents with original evidence and historical event dates.

Filters

Historical events use their original event dates. Latest event dates first. Severity follows existing archive classifications.

Jun 17, 2026

3 verified updates
The DIP token contract (Etherisc ecosystem) was exploited due to a missing return statement in the _transfer() function for PancakeSwap-routed trades, causing double transfers. The attacker used skim(router) and sync() to manipulate the pool and drain ~$111K USDC.ExpandCollapse

The DIP token contract (Etherisc ecosystem) was exploited due to a missing return statement in the _transfer() function for PancakeSwap-routed trades, causing double transfers. The attacker used skim(router) and sync() to manipulate the pool and drain ~$111K USDC.

Amount of loss
$ 111,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
OtherSecurity
On June 17, 2026, Little Boy Plus — a fully decentralized DeFi mining protocol on BSC claiming “no team, no admin keys” — was exploited. An attacker exploited a logic vulnerability in the LBPHashrate contract’s _update() function. By triggering it with a zero-value transferFrom call (bypassing OpenZeppelin authorization), the attacker unauthorizedly called _harvest and minted LBP tokens directly to the PancakeSwap LBP/USDT pair via mintReward. This inflated the pair’s balance without updating reserves, allowing the attacker to drain ~377,642 USDT (~$367k–$378k) through PancakePair.swap(). The funds were later sent to Tornado Cash.ExpandCollapse

On June 17, 2026, Little Boy Plus — a fully decentralized DeFi mining protocol on BSC claiming “no team, no admin keys” — was exploited. An attacker exploited a logic vulnerability in the LBPHashrate contract’s _update() function. By triggering it with a zero-value transferFrom call (bypassing OpenZeppelin authorization), the attacker unauthorizedly called _harvest and minted LBP tokens directly to the PancakeSwap LBP/USDT pair via mintReward. This inflated the pair’s balance without updating reserves, allowing the attacker to drain ~377,642 USDT (~$367k–$378k) through PancakePair.swap(). The funds were later sent to Tornado Cash.

Amount of loss
$ 367,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
BSC EcosystemSecurity

Jun 15, 2026

1 verified update
A legacy vault of Thetanuts Finance on Ethereum was exploited due to a flaw in redemption math and integer calculations in the mint/claim functions. The attacker used flash loans to drain approximately $2.1 million after reducing token supply to near zero. A whitehat recovered most funds (~$2M), resulting in a net loss of around $105K according to the project. Current products and active contracts were unaffected.ExpandCollapse

A legacy vault of Thetanuts Finance on Ethereum was exploited due to a flaw in redemption math and integer calculations in the mint/claim functions. The attacker used flash loans to drain approximately $2.1 million after reducing token supply to near zero. A whitehat recovered most funds (~$2M), resulting in a net loss of around $105K according to the project. Current products and active contracts were unaffected.

Amount of loss
$ 105,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
ETH EcosystemSecurity

Jun 14, 2026

1 verified update
An attacker exploited a vulnerability in the incomplete proof verification logic of the deprecated Aztec Connect Router contract on Ethereum, draining approximately $2.1 million in assets. The protocol had been deprecated for three years with no team control over the immutable contract. The current Aztec Network and AZTEC token were unaffected.ExpandCollapse

An attacker exploited a vulnerability in the incomplete proof verification logic of the deprecated Aztec Connect Router contract on Ethereum, draining approximately $2.1 million in assets. The protocol had been deprecated for three years with no team control over the immutable contract. The current Aztec Network and AZTEC token were unaffected.

Amount of loss
$ 2,100,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
ETH EcosystemSecurity

Jun 10, 2026

2 verified updates
Solana-based decentralized exchange Raydium disclosed a vulnerability in its deprecated AMM V3 program (phased out in 2021), which allowed an attacker to drain approximately $1.34 million from five inactive liquidity pools (Sollet USDT-RAY, Sollet ETH-RAY, SRM-RAY, USDC-RAY, and RAY-SOL). The flaw was due to insufficient validation of LP mint addresses, enabling the attacker to create a fake LP token and bypass proportion checks to withdraw funds. No current users, active programs, SDK, or dApp were affected. Raydium will fully compensate losses from its treasury and is conducting a security review of mainnet programs.ExpandCollapse

Solana-based decentralized exchange Raydium disclosed a vulnerability in its deprecated AMM V3 program (phased out in 2021), which allowed an attacker to drain approximately $1.34 million from five inactive liquidity pools (Sollet USDT-RAY, Sollet ETH-RAY, SRM-RAY, USDC-RAY, and RAY-SOL). The flaw was due to insufficient validation of LP mint addresses, enabling the attacker to create a fake LP token and bypass proportion checks to withdraw funds. No current users, active programs, SDK, or dApp were affected. Raydium will fully compensate losses from its treasury and is conducting a security review of mainnet programs.

Amount of loss
$ 1,340,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
ETH EcosystemSecurity
An attacker exploited a vulnerability in Secret Network’s modified CW20-ICS20 contract used for the Axelar IBC bridge. By creating a fake Cosmos chain and sending forged IBC deposit packets (the contract had critical source-channel verification checks commented out), the attacker minted approximately $4.67 million in unbacked “saTokens” (Secret-wrapped versions of Axelar-bridged assets). These were redeemed through the legitimate bridge channel, draining real assets from Axelar’s escrow in about 18 minutes. Funds were then bridged out via Osmosis to Ethereum and mostly cashed out on exchanges. The incident was detected on June 17 and publicly disclosed on June 19. Axelar paused the Secret bridge routes; its core protocol and other chains were unaffected. No funds have been recovered.ExpandCollapse

An attacker exploited a vulnerability in Secret Network’s modified CW20-ICS20 contract used for the Axelar IBC bridge. By creating a fake Cosmos chain and sending forged IBC deposit packets (the contract had critical source-channel verification checks commented out), the attacker minted approximately $4.67 million in unbacked “saTokens” (Secret-wrapped versions of Axelar-bridged assets). These were redeemed through the legitimate bridge channel, draining real assets from Axelar’s escrow in about 18 minutes. Funds were then bridged out via Osmosis to Ethereum and mostly cashed out on exchanges. The incident was detected on June 17 and publicly disclosed on June 19. Axelar paused the Secret bridge routes; its core protocol and other chains were unaffected. No funds have been recovered.

Amount of loss
$ 4,670,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
ETH EcosystemSecurity

Jun 9, 2026

5 verified updates
Asterix Labs (a fork of the Flooring Protocol NFT liquidity platform) suffered an exploit targeting its $ASTX token contract. Attackers drained approximately $40,000 by exploiting a smart contract vulnerability in the shared DN404/BT404 token standard codebase—the same flaw used in the Flooring Protocol attack the previous day. The project team immediately acknowledged the incident on X and stated they are investigating, with a full post-mortem to follow.ExpandCollapse

Asterix Labs (a fork of the Flooring Protocol NFT liquidity platform) suffered an exploit targeting its $ASTX token contract. Attackers drained approximately $40,000 by exploiting a smart contract vulnerability in the shared DN404/BT404 token standard codebase—the same flaw used in the Flooring Protocol attack the previous day. The project team immediately acknowledged the incident on X and stated they are investigating, with a full post-mortem to follow.

Amount of loss
$ 40,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
NFTSecurity
Haedal Protocol’s Vault pools on Sui suffered an exploit due to a hidden cross-version logic flaw from a 2025 upgrade. The attacker used deprecated old deposit paths to mint inflated LP shares and redeemed them via new paths for excess underlying assets, causing ~$915k in direct losses. Haedal has paused the affected contracts, will fully compensate users, and is preparing a patched upgrade.ExpandCollapse

Haedal Protocol’s Vault pools on Sui suffered an exploit due to a hidden cross-version logic flaw from a 2025 upgrade. The attacker used deprecated old deposit paths to mint inflated LP shares and redeemed them via new paths for excess underlying assets, causing ~$915k in direct losses. Haedal has paused the affected contracts, will fully compensate users, and is preparing a patched upgrade.

Amount of loss
$ 915,179
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
OtherSecurity
Humanity Protocol suffered a security incident where private keys of a Humanity Foundation member were compromised, leading to the draining of large amounts of $H tokens from multiple linked wallets (interacted with the project’s contracts). The stolen funds were swapped for ETH, with losses exceeding $30M and the $H token crashing ~90%. The team urged users not to interact with the bridge or liquidity pools.ExpandCollapse

Humanity Protocol suffered a security incident where private keys of a Humanity Foundation member were compromised, leading to the draining of large amounts of $H tokens from multiple linked wallets (interacted with the project’s contracts). The stolen funds were swapped for ETH, with losses exceeding $30M and the $H token crashing ~90%. The team urged users not to interact with the bridge or liquidity pools.

Amount of loss
$ 31,000,000
Attack method
Private Key Leakage
ETH EcosystemSecurity
The NovaBox platform’s reward pool on Ethereum was hacked. The attacker borrowed 427.5 WETH via an Aave V3 flash loan and exploited a flaw in the reward distribution mechanism (dividends distributed before balance updates on deposits/withdrawals). By first depositing a small amount of NOVA tokens to trigger dividend calculation and then a large ETH deposit to inflate their actual share—while the system still calculated based on the old small share—they generated approximately 145.82 ETH in “phantom dividends,” draining the pool from 65.11 ETH to 0.09 ETH (99.86% loss) in a single transaction. Security firm F12 confirmed it was not a smart contract vulnerability but a flaw in the reward mechanism logic.ExpandCollapse

The NovaBox platform’s reward pool on Ethereum was hacked. The attacker borrowed 427.5 WETH via an Aave V3 flash loan and exploited a flaw in the reward distribution mechanism (dividends distributed before balance updates on deposits/withdrawals). By first depositing a small amount of NOVA tokens to trigger dividend calculation and then a large ETH deposit to inflate their actual share—while the system still calculated based on the old small share—they generated approximately 145.82 ETH in “phantom dividends,” draining the pool from 65.11 ETH to 0.09 ETH (99.86% loss) in a single transaction. Security firm F12 confirmed it was not a smart contract vulnerability but a flaw in the reward mechanism logic.

Amount of loss
$ 93,600
Attack method
Flash Loan Attack
ETH EcosystemSecurity
Token of Power (TOP) suffered a governance takeover exploit due to misconfiguration in its Aragon DAO (no timelock). The attacker used funds from Tornado Cash to acquire majority voting power (>50% of the small 16,384 TOP supply), passed a malicious proposal in a single transaction to mint billions of new TOP tokens, and drained 944.2 WETH (~$1.58M) from the TOP/WETH Balancer V1 liquidity pool. Balancer protocol itself was not exploited.ExpandCollapse

Token of Power (TOP) suffered a governance takeover exploit due to misconfiguration in its Aragon DAO (no timelock). The attacker used funds from Tornado Cash to acquire majority voting power (>50% of the small 16,384 TOP supply), passed a malicious proposal in a single transaction to mint billions of new TOP tokens, and drained 944.2 WETH (~$1.58M) from the TOP/WETH Balancer V1 liquidity pool. Balancer protocol itself was not exploited.

Amount of loss
$ 1,580,000
Attack method
Malicious Governance Takeover
ExchangeSecurity

Jun 8, 2026

4 verified updates
Ambient Finance (formerly CrocSwap) was exploited via an accounting logic flaw in surplus collateral handling. The attacker used a flash loan and rapid cycling through HotProxy/WarmPath/ColdPath operations to drain ~83.72 ETH (~$110.6K) from the protocol’s monolithic smart contract.ExpandCollapse

Ambient Finance (formerly CrocSwap) was exploited via an accounting logic flaw in surplus collateral handling. The attacker used a flash loan and rapid cycling through HotProxy/WarmPath/ColdPath operations to drain ~83.72 ETH (~$110.6K) from the protocol’s monolithic smart contract.

Amount of loss
$ 110,600
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
ETH EcosystemSecurity
Flooring Protocol V2 and BitmapPunks (BT404 / $BMP) were exploited due to a BT404-style packed ownership logic vulnerability (malicious high-bit token ID alias + unchecked integer underflow). The attacker minted near-infinite fpTokens/$BMP with a dust amount of WETH, drained liquidity pools, and extracted high-value NFTs (e.g., BAYC, CryptoPunks) at low cost. Yuga Labs quickly intervened with a white-hat operation via GrailsOTC, rescuing 68 NFTs worth over $500,000, now held safely for return after fixes.ExpandCollapse

Flooring Protocol V2 and BitmapPunks (BT404 / $BMP) were exploited due to a BT404-style packed ownership logic vulnerability (malicious high-bit token ID alias + unchecked integer underflow). The attacker minted near-infinite fpTokens/$BMP with a dust amount of WETH, drained liquidity pools, and extracted high-value NFTs (e.g., BAYC, CryptoPunks) at low cost. Yuga Labs quickly intervened with a white-hat operation via GrailsOTC, rescuing 68 NFTs worth over $500,000, now held safely for return after fixes.

Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
ExchangeSecurity
On June 8, 2026, OpenMonero's P2P trading platform server was breached. The hacker gained root access and stole approximately 200 XMR. The project owner announced on Telegram that all funds were lost; the attack was not at the application layer.ExpandCollapse

On June 8, 2026, OpenMonero's P2P trading platform server was breached. The hacker gained root access and stole approximately 200 XMR. The project owner announced on Telegram that all funds were lost; the attack was not at the application layer.

Amount of loss
$ 62,900
Attack method
Supply Chain Attack
ExchangeSecurity
Syscoin Bridge was exploited. The attacker leveraged a validation issue in the bridge flow, resulting in an unauthorized creation of approximately 5 billion SYS on the UTXO side. The funds were subsequently moved and split. The team has paused the bridge, is actively tracing the tainted outputs, coordinating with exchanges for blacklisting/monitoring, and working on a fix and remediation.ExpandCollapse

Syscoin Bridge was exploited. The attacker leveraged a validation issue in the bridge flow, resulting in an unauthorized creation of approximately 5 billion SYS on the UTXO side. The funds were subsequently moved and split. The team has paused the bridge, is actively tracing the tainted outputs, coordinating with exchanges for blacklisting/monitoring, and working on a fix and remediation.

Amount of loss
$ 10,000,000
Attack method
Bridge Verification Flaw
BridgeSecurity

Jun 5, 2026

1 verified update
The DTXT/USDT liquidity pair on BSC was exploited. The attacker exploited a forgeable liquidity-addition detection logic in the DTXT contract (by sending a small amount of USDT directly to the pair address, tricking the contract into classifying large sells as liquidity additions). This bypassed sell fees and drained the pool, resulting in a loss of approximately $35,041 USDT.ExpandCollapse

The DTXT/USDT liquidity pair on BSC was exploited. The attacker exploited a forgeable liquidity-addition detection logic in the DTXT contract (by sending a small amount of USDT directly to the pair address, tricking the contract into classifying large sells as liquidity additions). This bypassed sell fees and drained the pool, resulting in a loss of approximately $35,041 USDT.

Amount of loss
$ 35,041
Attack method
Business Logic Vulnerability
BSC EcosystemSecurity

Jun 4, 2026

2 verified updates
The ATM token on BSC was exploited due to a flaw in its custom transferFrom() function logic (which automatically swapped ~20% of transferred amounts to BSC-USD). The attacker repeatedly triggered the mechanism to drain approximately $243,500 from the protocol.ExpandCollapse

The ATM token on BSC was exploited due to a flaw in its custom transferFrom() function logic (which automatically swapped ~20% of transferred amounts to BSC-USD). The attacker repeatedly triggered the mechanism to drain approximately $243,500 from the protocol.

Amount of loss
$ 243,500
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
BSC EcosystemSecurity
The public triggerAutoBurn() maintenance function in BYToken contract on BSC was abused. The attacker took a Moolah flashloan (~422k WBNB), performed Pancake swaps, then called the unprivileged function. This burned ~67.8 quadrillion BY directly from the BY/WBNB pair and called pair.sync(), rewriting reserves to 1 BY + full WBNB. The extreme skew allowed massive BY sells to drain nearly all WBNB liquidity, netting the attacker ~146.60 BNB ($87,402).ExpandCollapse

The public triggerAutoBurn() maintenance function in BYToken contract on BSC was abused. The attacker took a Moolah flashloan (~422k WBNB), performed Pancake swaps, then called the unprivileged function. This burned ~67.8 quadrillion BY directly from the BY/WBNB pair and called pair.sync(), rewriting reserves to 1 BY + full WBNB. The extreme skew allowed massive BY sells to drain nearly all WBNB liquidity, netting the attacker ~146.60 BNB ($87,402).

Amount of loss
$ 87,402
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
BSC EcosystemSecurity

Jun 3, 2026

1 verified update
ApeBond's ApeYieldVault smart contract on BSC was exploited. The attacker used a public helper contract to call migrateToVotingEscrow with duplicate pool IDs, inflating a lock amount from ~1.71 quadrillion ABOND to ~29 quadrillion ABOND. They then unlocked, claimed the inflated lock, sold ABOND in the public ABOND/WBNB pool, repaid a Moolah flashloan, and kept ~5.72 WBNB profit. The entire flow was permissionless and on-chain.ExpandCollapse

ApeBond's ApeYieldVault smart contract on BSC was exploited. The attacker used a public helper contract to call migrateToVotingEscrow with duplicate pool IDs, inflating a lock amount from ~1.71 quadrillion ABOND to ~29 quadrillion ABOND. They then unlocked, claimed the inflated lock, sold ABOND in the public ABOND/WBNB pool, repaid a Moolah flashloan, and kept ~5.72 WBNB profit. The entire flow was permissionless and on-chain.

Amount of loss
$ 3,421
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
BSC EcosystemSecurity

Jun 1, 2026

4 verified updates
ATOHook smart contract was exploited due to a storage slot collision between the rewards mapping and Solady’s fixed ReentrancyGuard slot. The nonReentrant modifier in getReward() wrote a sentinel value that was misinterpreted as a reward balance for a colliding address, allowing the attacker to repeatedly claim and drain a fixed amount of ETH (200 times), stealing approximately 14.41 ETH.ExpandCollapse

ATOHook smart contract was exploited due to a storage slot collision between the rewards mapping and Solady’s fixed ReentrancyGuard slot. The nonReentrant modifier in getReward() wrote a sentinel value that was misinterpreted as a reward balance for a colliding address, allowing the attacker to repeatedly claim and drain a fixed amount of ETH (200 times), stealing approximately 14.41 ETH.

Amount of loss
$ 25,000
Attack method
Smart Contract Vulnerability
ETH EcosystemSecurity