News

Foresight News reported that the blockchain interoperability protocol Hyperbridge has disclosed details of the previous DOT attack incident, resulting in a loss of approximately $237,000. The root cause of the vulnerability was the lack of input validation in the HandlerV1 contract's VerifyProof() function, which did not check whether leaf_index < leafCount, allowing attackers to forge Merkle proofs. Through this, the attacker obtained administrator rights for the bridged DOT token contract on Ethereum, subsequently minting 1 billion bridged DOT (about 2,800 times the legitimate circulating supply of approximately 356,000 tokens), and cashed out on decentralized exchanges. Hyperbridge stated that, at present, they are tracking the funds with security partners, and cross-chain functionality will remain suspended until the investigation is complete.

According to Odaily, on-chain analytics platform glassnode posted on X stating that after experiencing a dramatic deleveraging in early October 2025, XRP perpetual contract open interest (OI) fell sharply from 7 billion to 2 billion, a drop of 71%. Subsequently, market positions were further compressed, with OI declining by another 25% to 1.5 billion. The market has not yet rebuilt speculative positions, indicating that derivatives traders overall remain cautious, and risk appetite has not yet clearly recovered.

BlockBeats News, April 13th: According to an April 13th article in the American Bankers Association (ABA) Banking Journal, experts including the ABA's Chief Economist pointed out that the recent research report on payment stablecoins by the White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) raised incorrect questions that could mislead policymakers. The CEA report mainly explores "how banning the issuance of payment stablecoins would affect bank lending," and concludes that banning issuance would only increase bank lending by about $1.2 billion, with little impact. However, the ABA believes that the real policy concern is not the consequences of "banning," but the risks that "allowing" the issuance of payment stablecoins with yield may bring: Accelerated deposit outflow: Allowing yield would incentivize households and businesses to move funds from bank deposits (especially community banks) to stablecoins, with a significant impact when the market size expands to $1-2 trillion. ABA's analysis shows that loans in just one state, Iowa, could decrease by $4.4 billion to $8.7 billion as a result. Impact on community banks: Deposit outflows will force community banks to replace funds with higher-cost wholesale funding (such as Federal Home Loan Bank prepayments), raising their funding costs and reducing loans to local households and small businesses. Not a harmless "reshuffling": While the CEA believes that deposits would only "reshuffle" within the banking system, with little overall impact, the ABA points out that if deposits flow from community banks to a few large institutions or stablecoin reserve accounts, it will harm areas reliant on relationship-based bank lending. The ABA believes that banning the issuance of payment stablecoins with yield is a prudent protective measure that can allow stablecoins to mature as a payment innovation tool, rather than becoming an economic risk as an alternative to insured deposits.