hack or exploit

CertiK flags $820K exploit draining NEM token’s PancakeSwap liquidity pool

0Importance
closedStatus
2News media
3Pieces
Published
Updated
Since then
2 new reports
In
DeFi
Also mentions
USDTBNB

An exploit hit the NEM token’s PancakeSwap liquidity pool on BNB Chain, with estimates around $820,000. New coverage adds that the token trades as Newmont under the NEM ticker, and that the attack used custom accounting in the NemTokenV2 contract rather than a flaw in PancakeSwap itself.

Key claims & sources

✓
CertiK flagged the exploit as affecting NEM token liquidity on PancakeSwap.
✓
0xCERT said the NEM token was hit by an exploit that drained roughly $820,000 from a PancakeSwap USDT/NEM liquidity pool.
✓
The advisory said the NemTokenV2 contract’s sell-tracking logic appears to have been used to manipulate pool reserves and extract value from the pair.
✓
A BNB Chain token called Newmont, which trades under the NEM ticker, suffered a smart-contract exploit that drained approximately $821,920 from its PancakeSwap liquidity pool.

What it means

Liquidity providers in the USDT/NEM pool are the direct losers, with roughly $820,000 in pooled value extracted through manipulated reserves rather than a hack of PancakeSwap's core code. Anyone holding the NEM-ticker token now holds a position in a contract whose sell logic has been shown to be exploitable, and traders need to check they are not confusing this asset with unrelated projects sharing the same ticker. Exchanges and aggregators listing the pair face pressure to pull or flag it.

PancakeSwap itself was not breached, which is the uncomfortable part: the exploit lived entirely inside one project's token contract, a reminder that an AMM's security is only as strong as the weakest custom code paired against it. Open listing without mandatory audits lets any team ship novel accounting logic straight into a liquidity pool holding real USDT, and CertiK's own advisory underscores that gap between permissionless deployment and the due diligence investors assume has already happened.

Watch whether 0xCERT or CertiK publish a follow-up identifying the attacker address and whether any funds get frozen or returned, as has happened in some past BSC pool drains. Also watch whether the Newmont team patches or abandons NemTokenV2, and whether PancakeSwap or data aggregators formally delist the pair under the NEM ticker, which would settle whether this becomes a contained $821,920 loss or a longer dispute over naming and liability.

Market reaction i

PancakeSwapCAKE the event is about this asset
first headline
0.0% 2 h before
-0.5% 4 h after
$2.16price at publication
12data points

Coverage timeline

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.

first
Oct 22 10:12
+1 d 2 h
Oct 23 12:19
The Cryptocurrency Post context
Its angle: pendinglpsellrecycle, distinguishing, manipulated; with quotes
+1 d 3 h
Oct 23 13:48
The Crypto Guardian context
Its angle: infrastructure, approximately, vulnerability; with quotes

Thefts of a similar size

WhenWhat happenedFigure
7 months ago WhalebitOracleManipulation · Algebra spot-price oracle manipulation incident $824k
6 months ago Echo Protocol · Private key leakage incident $821.7k
6 months ago Echo Bridge · Private Key Compromised incident $821k
4 months ago Hinkal · Deposit Logic Flaw incident $820k
3.4 years ago Pawnfi · Business logic flaw incident $820k

4280 incidents stored · 999 were as large as this one or larger ($822k)