ONE PIECE (ONEPIECE) news

Understanding the Security Behind Bitget's Withdrawal Process

Bitget has quickly grown to become one of the world's leading crypto exchanges, with over 20 million users. Our success is largely due to our commitment to user protection. However, some users find the withdrawal process a bit confusing, especially the varying number of verification steps required. This article will explain the process and emphasize the importance of these security measures. Why Does Bitget Use Multi-Step Verification? Bitget employs a multi-layered security approach to ensure the safety of user accounts and assets. This means that even if one security measure is bypassed, others will still protect your account. By integrating multiple authentication methods, Bitget creates a complex and resilient defense system against unauthorized access. By having multiple layers of security, Bitget makes it extremely difficult for attackers to breach your account. This is why we sometimes require up to four steps of verification. If you have set up a fund password, Bitget may require you to go through four steps of verification: - Fund Password: This is a unique password that you set specifically for transactions. Even if someone gains access to your login credentials, they would still need this password to withdraw funds. - Mobile Phone OTP (One-Time Password): This is a code sent to your registered mobile phone. It is valid for only a short period and can only be used once. Even if an attacker knows your password, they would also need access to your phone to get the OTP. - Email OTP: Similar to the mobile phone OTP, this code is sent to your registered email address. It adds another layer of security by requiring access to your email account. - 2FA (Two-Factor Authentication): This typically involves an app like Google Authenticator, which generates a time-sensitive code. Even if an attacker has your login credentials and can access your phone and email, they would still need this code to complete the withdrawal. However, sometimes only three steps are required, which usually excludes the mobile phone OTP. The number of steps can vary depending on your current device and IP address. This dynamic approach balances security and convenience based on your particular situation. The Importance of Multi-Step Verification While some users might find these multiple steps annoying, they are crucial for security. Here’s why: Improves Security Multi-step verification provides enhanced security by adding multiple layers of protection. Each layer acts like a distinct barrier, requiring specific pieces of information from different sources. Even if an attacker manages to breach one layer, such as obtaining your password, the additional layers of verification (like access to your phone for the OTP and your email for another code) will still protect your funds. This multi-layered approach ensures that even if one security measure is compromised, the subsequent layers continue to protect your account. It would be much harder for bad actors to take over your account and withdraw funds without your permission when the multi-step verification is in place. Prevents Unauthorized Access Multi-step verification makes it significantly more difficult for attackers to gain unauthorized access to your account. An attacker would need to bypass several independent security measures, each requiring different pieces of information and access to different devices. OTPs and 2FA codes are time-sensitive, meaning they are only valid for a short period, adding an extra layer of difficulty for attackers who must act quickly to use the codes. Additionally, an attacker would need access to multiple devices, such as your phone for OTPs and 2FA, and your email account for the email OTP, to complete the verification process. This complexity and requirement for multiple devices make it exponentially harder for unauthorized individuals to access your account, thereby significantly reducing the risk of unauthorized access. Protects Personal Information Protecting your personal information is crucial because your cryptocurrency account contains not only your digital assets but also personal details such as your email address, phone number, and possibly more sensitive data. If an attacker gains access to this information, they can commit identity theft, leading to serious consequences like fraudulent transactions and damage to your credit score. Additionally, personal information can be used in phishing attacks to trick you or others into revealing more sensitive information or performing unauthorized transactions. Maintaining your privacy by securing your personal information reduces the risk of your data being exploited for malicious purposes. Multi-step verification helps protect this information by ensuring that only you, with access to multiple verification methods, can access your account. Prevents Account Takeovers Account takeovers occur when an attacker gains control of your account and changes the login credentials, locking you out. Multi-step verification prevents this by adding layered security, where each verification step is an additional barrier that an attacker must bypass to gain full control of your account. Change detection is another crucial aspect, as some verification steps can trigger alerts or additional verification if changes to account settings or credentials are attempted, providing you with an opportunity to respond and secure your account. Furthermore, the difficulty in resetting information plays a significant role; even if an attacker manages to reset one piece of information, such as your password, they would still need to pass the other verification steps to make any significant changes to your account. By requiring multiple verification steps, Bitget ensures that even if an attacker gains access to your account, they cannot easily change your login details and take over your account, thus helping you maintain better control over your account and assets. Addressing User Concerns Bitget acknowledges that the multi-step verification process might be annoying for some users. However, we believe that it is better to be safe than sorry. We apologize for any inconvenience caused but assure users that these measures are essential for ensuring the security of your own accounts and assets. While the multi-step verification process might seem inconvenient, it is a small price to pay for the security of your assets. Bitget’s robust security measures have resulted in zero security incidents so far. We understand the potential inconvenience, but we emphasize that these measures are in place to protect users, and that we have and will continue to do our best to improve our products, making them more secure and convenient at the same time. To learn more about our security measures, please visit: Bitget’s Commitment to Educating Users About Crypto Risks and Best Security Practices Beyond Passwords - An Advanced Security Guide on Bitget Common Cryptocurrency Scams: Bitget's Safety Guide Bitget's Ultimate Shield: Your Guide to Defeating Phishing Scams Bitget Proof-of-Reserves (PoR) in June 2024 Introduction to Bitget Protection Fund

The $73.5 Million Curve Finance Hack: Unveiling the Story Behind the Incident

TL;DR - Curve Finance and other interconnected protocols suffered a breach with $73.5 million at stake. - Amidst the attack, white-hat hackers and MEV bots strived to front-run the attacker to recover funds. - Redemption efforts emerged through a joint initiative, returning a substantial portion of the pilfered funds. - The root cause was a hidden compiler bug in the programming language Vyper that created a ripple of vulnerabilities. - The incident further highlighted the need for safeguarding DeFi assets. On a gloomy Sunday, July 30th, the world of DeFi was rocked by an event that sent shockwaves throughout the blockchain ecosystem. Curve Finance, a cornerstone of the DeFi world known for its integral role in providing liquidity for ETH-pegged assets, was exploited and the hack had far-reaching consequences that extended beyond its immediate impact. With a staggering $73.5 million at stake, this breach not only exposed vulnerabilities within Curve Finance but also triggered a harrowing domino effect, affecting an array of interconnected protocols reliant on Curve's liquidity infrastructure. As we delve into the labyrinthine story behind the hack and its aftermath, we uncover how a single breach can send ripples of uncertainty through the DeFi landscape. A Gloomy Sunday: From Vulnerability to Chaos The story began with an unassuming alert from PeckShield, a renowned blockchain security firm, about unusual activities stirring within the NFT lending protocol, JPEG’d. As the digital ink on PeckShield's warning was still drying, Curve Finance entered with a swift dismissal in the form of a now-deleted tweet, attributing the concerns to a mere "read-only reentrancy bug." Little did they know that this proclamation would be the precursor to a tumultuous series of events that revolved around Curve themselves. Following the $11.5 million exploit of JPEG’d, a crescendo of attacks unfolded across different DeFi pools. - Alchemix DAO's alETH-ETH pool bore the brunt of a $22 million hit, losing $13.6 million worth of ETH and $8.4 million in ERC-20 tokens. - The Metronome DAO's sETH-ETH pool followed suit, suffering a $1.6 million loss. - Curve Finance, the epicenter of the storm, found itself in the crosshairs as its CRV/ETH pool sustained a devastating blow. Michael Egorov, Curve's CEO, took to Telegram to confirm that $22 million worth of CRV tokens had been siphoned from Curve's swap pool. Amidst the unfolding turmoil, a band of white-hat hackers emerged, determined to salvage the compromised funds. Their efforts, however, were repeatedly outpaced by the hackers they sought to thwart. In this intricate dance between virtue and vice, an unexpected protagonist emerged: the MEV bots. These digital agents successfully front-ran the hackers and orchestrated the return of stolen funds from these front-runs of malicious transactions, a gesture that revealed the nuanced interplay between ethical hacking and illicit exploits. One distinctive figure among them, c0ffeebabe.eth, extracted around $5.3 million from Curve's CRV/ETH pool and approximately $1.6 million from the Metronome msETH pool, then reinstated the funds to the afflicted protocols. A Hidden Door: Understanding the Cause of the Breach Initially, the source of the hacks was attributed to a commonly known vulnerability termed the "read-only reentrancy," which had plagued several protocols in recent months. However, a deeper investigation revealed a more complex and unique root cause. The exploited contracts were not external projects relying on Curve pools as price references; rather, they were the Curve pools themselves. The underlying issue traced back to a previously unknown compiler bug in certain older versions of Vyper, the programming language employed for Curve's contract development. Specifically, versions 0.2.15, 0.2.16, and 0.3.0 of Vyper had vulnerabilities that rendered certain smart contracts susceptible to reentrancy attacks. A reentrancy attack, in simple terms, is like when someone finds a way to take more candy from a candy jar than they’re supposed to. Imagine there’s a candy jar that only lets you take one piece of candy at a time. But someone finds a way to trick the candy jar into giving them more than one piece of candy every time they ask for it. They keep doing this until all the candy is gone. In a similar way, a reentrancy attack happens in computer programs known as smart contracts, but instead of candies, it involves money, and hackers find a way to repeatedly take more money than they should from these contracts. These attacks manipulate contract balances by deceiving the protocol into miscalculating, thereby facilitating the illicit withdrawal of held funds. As a matter of fact, this bug had been exploitable since 2021, and its inadvertent patching was released in December 2021 with version 0.3.1, but there was little public recognition of both the bug and its remedy. Criticism intensified when BlockSec and Supremacy, two self-proclaimed leading blockchain security agencies, revealed the details of the vulnerability, especially the version numbers that were at risk, while the exploit and mitigation efforts were still in progress. Beyond the Breach: DeFi’s Quest for Redemption In a striking display of collaboration and a bid for redemption, a joint effort emerged on August 3rd, spearheaded by Curve, Metronome, and Alchemix. United by a common purpose, the protocols put forward an initiative to recover the stolen funds from the recent attack. A 10% bounty of the pilfered funds was extended as an incentive, enticing those responsible for the breach to step forward and relinquish the remaining 90%. This bold endeavor, offering a potential reward nearing $7 million, arrived with a pledge of leniency—promising an absence of further legal measures or involvement of law enforcement. This was the way the protocols conveyed their desire to resolve the matter through civilized means. The response was swift. In less than a day, on August 4th, the original perpetrator of the multimillion-dollar exploit seemingly embraced the olive branch extended. A wave of restitution began as the hacker initiated the return of the funds acquired just days prior. First, a total of $9 million flowed back into the coffers of Alchemix Finance and Curve Finance. Then within hours on August 5th, the hacker fully restored the stolen funds to Alchemix and JPEG’d. Amidst this astonishing turnaround, the attacker communicated a resolute message, possibly intended for the Alchemix and Curve teams. The statement indicated a willingness to return the funds not due to apprehension, but rather as an act of preserving the integrity of the protocols in question. Irrespective of his motives, his decision to return the funds stood as a rarity among hackers. That combined with efforts of white hat hackers and MEV bots racing to counter the exploits on July 30th, a remarkable outcome was achieved: approximately 73% of the pilfered funds, amounting to nearly $52.3 million, were successfully recovered and returned. This unprecedented level of retrieval stands as a testament to the intricate interplay and multifaceted dynamics among ethical intervention, community power, and advanced technology within the DeFi landscape. Lessons Etched in Blockchain: Safeguarding Your DeFi Assets The Curve incident is one of the very rare occurrences where the majority of the exploited funds have been successfully restored to the affected protocols. That said, not all has been restored and in most incidents, lost funds are lost forever. In the DeFi world, relying solely on the hope of attackers returning stolen funds is pure wishful thinking. Users should consider alternative measures like insurance or protections that offer 100% guarantees against potential losses. Bitget's $300 million Protection Fund stands as a notable example, fortified by 6500 BTC and $160 million in stablecoins. This fund ensures users are covered for losses not arising from their actions or the platform's behavior. Another safeguard is the Proof-of-Reserve, a reassurance that centralized entities maintain a 1:1 reserve ratio for users' funds, ensuring their successful withdrawal at all times. For instance, Bitget pledges maximum transparency with a current reserve ratio of 244%, showcasing 2.5 times the users' assets in BTC, ETH, and USDT. Last but not least, through cold storage technology, most digital assets are held offline in secure multi-signature wallets, significantly reducing exposure to online threats. These measures, validated by leading security firms, encapsulate Bitget's dedication to preserving user assets in a robust and fortified environment. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are for informational purposes only. This article does not constitute an endorsement of any of the products and services discussed or investment, financial, or trading advice. Qualified professionals should be consulted prior to making financial decisions.