THORChain co-founder says acting against Bitget hacker was possible but difficult
THORChain’s validator structure and trading controls left no quick wallet-specific shutdown for the Bitget-linked funds, and some actions needed two-thirds validator approval. Chad Barraford later said he would bring the idea of refunding some fee income tied to the stolen funds to the protocol’s Treasury.
What this rests on
What it means
Each sentence links inside to the piece that supports it.
Users and traders on THORChain are the ones most likely to notice the validator limits first, because the network cannot use a pause aimed at just one wallet and some responses need two-thirds approval. That means the practical window for acting on the Bitget-linked funds is shaped by the time it takes validators to coordinate, not by a single operator’s decision.
In practice, the network’s normal routing and swap activity can keep operating unless a broader pause or a high-threshold vote is reached. The later Treasury discussion adds a separate path: part of the developer fund’s income from those swaps could be sent back, but that is only a matter Barraford said he would bring up.
Market reaction
How the story was built
Every piece in order, with the time its news medium declares — if it is not believable we use ours and say so — and what it added to what was already known at that point. Arriving first is not the same as adding something.
Other recent incidents
| When | What happened | Figure |
|---|---|---|
| 2 days ago | KolanHook (1.279453 ETH) incident | no figure in dollars |
| 3 days ago | UNCX Network V2 · Incorrect Share Accounting incident | $86k |
| 3 days ago | Pirate Chain · Transaction validation vulnerability incident | $10.7M |
| 4 days ago | Gamdom · Hot wallet server compromise incident | $4.2M |
| 7 days ago | Papertrade · Price manipulation incident | $1.3M |
4197 incidents stored