INIT (Initia) Deposits and Withdrawals Temporarily Paused
Kraken and KuCoin both paused INIT deposits and withdrawals on Oct. 23, while Kraken said the rest of its funding methods stayed available. A later report said Initia’s network faced a $2.7 million exploit, and South Korean exchanges Bithumb and Upbit later marked INIT as a caution asset and suspended deposits and withdrawals under local rules.
Key claims & sources
What it means
Initia is a layer-1 blockchain built to host interwoven app-specific chains, and like other bridge-dependent networks it inherits the risk that comes with moving assets across chains. Bridges have been the industry's weakest point since the Ronin hack in 2022 and the Wormhole exploit the same year, both of which drained bridged funds while the underlying chains kept running. The Oct. 23 incident fits that pattern: an exploit tied to bridged assets, not a base-layer failure.
Traders holding INIT on Kraken or KuCoin cannot move it on or off those platforms until the pause lifts, and KuCoin has explicitly said it will not announce when service resumes, leaving users to check manually. South Korean holders face a harder constraint: Bithumb and Upbit's caution-asset designation under the Virtual Asset User Protection Act freezes deposits and withdrawals by regulatory mandate, not exchange discretion, so restoration depends on local compliance sign-off rather than a technical fix alone.
Kraken's status page and KuCoin's silence policy mean recovery will surface first through exchange re-enablement rather than a public announcement, so affected users should watch INIT's deposit status directly on each platform. In South Korea, removal of the caution-asset tag from Bithumb and Upbit under the Virtual Asset User Protection Act is the formal signal that regulators consider the $2.7 million exploit contained and bridged funds secured. (per kraken.com)
Market reaction i
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.
Thefts of a similar size
| When | What happened | Figure |
|---|---|---|
| 5 months ago | RetoSwap · Malicious proposal incident | $2.7M |
| 6 months ago | RetoSwap · Missing Input Validation incident | $2.7M |
| 8 months ago | SolvBTC · Infinite Mint incident | $2.7M |
| 11 months ago | Aevo · contract vulnerability incident | $2.7M |
| 11 months ago | Ribbon · Improper access control incident | $2.7M |
4282 incidents stored · 657 were as large as this one or larger ($2.7M)