According to @MikeBacina, AI-driven testing is now essential for smart contract code and increasingly vital for other security-critical code, signaling a shift toward automated audits in crypto projects, source: @MikeBacina on X, Dec 2, 2025. He warns that legacy software is likely to be broken into quickly, implying rising exploit risk for unaudited or outdated on-chain systems, source: @MikeBacina on X, Dec 2, 2025. For traders, this indicates higher tail-risk premiums for tokens tied to protocols with legacy codebases and potential positive repricing for projects that adopt AI-powered audits and timely security disclosures, source: @MikeBacina on X, Dec 2, 2025.

According to @AnthropicAI, its Frontier Red Team ran simulated tests and AI agents identified $4.6 million in smart contract exploits, indicating exploitable vulnerabilities under test conditions that are relevant to DeFi risk assessment. Source: @AnthropicAI. According to @AnthropicAI, the research collaboration with MATS program and the Anthropic Fellows program introduced a new benchmark for evaluating AI performance on blockchain smart contract security tasks, offering a structured way to measure exploit detection. Source: @AnthropicAI. According to @AnthropicAI, these findings come from simulated testing, quantifying exploit value discovered by AI agents in a controlled environment, which provides concrete data points for security evaluation. Source: @AnthropicAI. Based on @AnthropicAI’s reported results, traders focused on DeFi and smart-contract platforms can use the measured exploit value and the new benchmark as inputs when assessing protocol security posture and operational risk exposure during audits and risk reviews. Source: @AnthropicAI.

According to @binance, the exchange posted a Nov 23, 2025 security alert warning users about multisig scams and linked to a Binance Academy guide on what multisig scams are and how to avoid them (source: Binance tweet; Binance Academy). For traders, @binance’s alert highlights immediate operational risk to funds held in multisig setups, reinforcing the need to review signer controls and wallet security to prevent capital loss that could impact positions and liquidity (source: Binance security alert).

According to @PANewsCN, BNB Chain stated in an official X post that the recent Balancer exploit did not affect any BNB Chain projects (source: BNB Chain on X: https://x.com/BNBCHAIN/status/1985281881646969218). BNB Chain urged all forked projects to remain highly vigilant and consider pausing operations as a precaution (source: BNB Chain on X: https://x.com/BNBCHAIN/status/1985281881646969218). BNB Chain added that its team and partners are actively monitoring developments and emphasized maintaining security (source: BNB Chain on X: https://x.com/BNBCHAIN/status/1985281881646969218). For traders, this indicates no immediate direct risk to native BNB Chain protocols, but potential pauses by Balancer forks on BNB Chain could temporarily disrupt swaps, LP withdrawals, and liquidity routing, raising execution risk during any suspensions (source: BNB Chain on X: https://x.com/BNBCHAIN/status/1985281881646969218). Traders should track official updates from BNB Chain and forked protocols for changes that may influence BNB, BAL, and BNB Chain DeFi activity (source: BNB Chain on X: https://x.com/BNBCHAIN/status/1985281881646969218).

According to @PeckShieldAlert, the Radiant Capital exploiter deposited 5,411.8 ETH (about $20.7 million) into Tornado Cash on Oct 31, 2025, source: PeckShieldAlert on X, Oct 31, 2025. Tornado Cash is a crypto mixer that obfuscates transaction trails and was sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury for facilitating laundering of stolen funds, which complicates tracking and recovery of proceeds from exploits, source: U.S. Treasury (OFAC) press release, Aug 8, 2022. For trading, large hacked-fund deposits into mixers are typically followed by distribution across numerous fresh addresses, making on-chain monitoring of ETH flows critical for risk management, source: Chainalysis 2023 Crypto Crime Report.

According to @PeckShieldAlert, ZachXBT reported that Garden Finance was exploited for more than $5.5 million across multiple chains (source: @PeckShieldAlert on X; source: ZachXBT on X). @PeckShieldAlert also states the exploiter is in the process of swapping the stolen assets for ETH, confirming active on-chain conversions linked to the incident (source: @PeckShieldAlert on X). @PeckShieldAlert did not specify the affected chains or the exact assets stolen beyond the move into ETH (source: @PeckShieldAlert on X). For traders, the attacker’s ongoing swaps into ETH indicate exploit-related sell flow is currently moving through ETH pairs on-chain, allowing real‑time tracking of transaction activity during the incident window (source: @PeckShieldAlert on X).

According to the source, Typus Finance stated on its official X account that issues have been reported affecting the project on Sui (source: Typus Finance on X, Oct 15, 2025). In light of the project’s notice, traders can pause new deposits or contract approvals with Typus Finance and await official updates or a post-mortem to mitigate smart contract and counterparty risk when trading SUI and interacting with Sui DeFi (source: Typus Finance on X). Participants exposed via Typus-linked vaults or LP pools on Sui can review and potentially reduce positions and use conservative slippage and collateral settings when trading SUI until the team confirms resolution (source: Typus Finance on X).

According to the source, Ripple is partnering with Immunefi to host a $200,000 attackathon focused on finding bugs in the XRP Ledger (XRPL) lending protocol, with the reward pool stated as $200,000 and the target identified as the XRPL lending protocol (source: public social media post dated Oct 13, 2025). For trading relevance, monitor official communications from Ripple and Immunefi for the program’s scope, rules, duration, and any disclosed findings, as these announcements set headline timing that can influence XRP-focused sentiment and positioning (source: same post and forthcoming organizer updates).

According to the source, Ripple is offering a $200,000 reward to 'attack' an XRP Ledger (XRPL) lending protocol (source: the provided social media post dated Oct 13, 2025). Traders focused on XRP should note that the bounty centers on an XRPL lending protocol and specifies a $200,000 payout (source: the provided social media post dated Oct 13, 2025).

According to the source, Pendle stated that no protocol hack occurred; instead, a single user wallet was compromised and the attacker minted and sold PT and YT on Sep 30, 2025 (source: Pendle public statement on X, Sep 30, 2025). For traders, the incident is characterized as wallet-level rather than a protocol breach, with activity centered on PT/YT issuance and sell pressure (source: Pendle public statement on X, Sep 30, 2025).

According to @phantom, many crypto scams are not code-based but social engineering, where scammers build trust and then induce victims to click links, share keys, or approve transactions that grant them access. Source: Phantom on X, Sep 24, 2025. This creates direct exposure during link interactions, private key handling, and on-chain approval steps, with potential for wallet access and loss of funds if manipulated. Source: Phantom on X, Sep 24, 2025.

According to @PeckShieldAlert, the incident was a compromise of a user's personal wallet and is not related to the THORChain protocol, indicating no confirmed protocol-level exploit on THORChain at this time (source: x.com/PeckShieldAlert/status/1966409664008233379). For trading, this clarification means the event should be treated as user-side security risk rather than a protocol failure when assessing RUNE exposure and THORChain liquidity risk (source: x.com/PeckShieldAlert/status/1966409664008233379; reference: x.com/PeckShieldAlert/status/1966399712741016051).

According to @PeckShieldAlert, the loss for the phished Venus Protocol user has been corrected to approximately 13.5 million dollars after initial estimates were overstated by not excluding the debt position, and the update specifies this was a user-level phishing incident rather than a protocol exploit (source: @PeckShieldAlert, Sep 2, 2025).

According to @PeckShieldAlert, a Venus Protocol user lost about $27 million after approving a malicious transaction that granted token spending rights to attacker address 0x7fd8...202a, enabling asset transfers; source: @PeckShieldAlert. Given the user-targeted phishing vector and token-approval mechanism described, traders with exposure to Venus-related markets can prioritize allowance checks and monitor addresses interacting with 0x7fd8...202a for abnormal flows to gauge short-term risk; source: @PeckShieldAlert.

According to @tradeparadex, Paradex Network is increasing its bug bounty program to offer rewards up to $500,000 in a move to enhance platform security for users. Source: Paradex Network on X, Aug 25, 2025. The new phase is being executed in collaboration with Immunefi, with more information and participation instructions provided in the announcement link. Source: Paradex Network on X, Aug 25, 2025. The initiative explicitly aims to safeguard the platform and reward security researchers, signaling a heightened focus on risk reduction relevant to active traders. Source: Paradex Network on X, Aug 25, 2025.

According to PeckShieldAlert, the DeFi protocol ArcadiaFi has suffered an exploit resulting in losses of approximately $2.5 million. The security firm reported that the attacker converted the stolen assets into about 840 ETH. Following the swap, the exploiter bridged these funds from the Base network to the Ethereum mainnet, as detailed in the alert.

According to EmberCN, the GMX project team sold 10,000 ETH for 29.597 million USDT at an average price of $2,959 per coin. This action followed a hacker's return of assets, which included the 10,000 ETH (valued at $30 million) and 10.495 million FRAX stablecoins. The source suggests that converting the returned Ethereum into the stablecoin USDT is likely a strategic move to prepare for refunding assets to the affected users, as monitored via the GMX Security Committee's multi-signature address.

According to @EmberCN, the hacker involved with the GMX protocol has reportedly returned assets totaling approximately $40 million. The returned funds consist of 10.495 million FRAX and 10,000 ETH, the latter valued at around $30 million, as stated in the analysis. The report from @EmberCN further notes that the hacker's wallet still contains 1,700 ETH, worth about $5 million. This amount corresponds to the $5 million white-hat bounty previously offered by the GMX project, implying the hacker may have kept it as a reward. This resolution could positively influence trader sentiment and the stability of the GMX token by restoring funds and demonstrating a conclusion to the security incident.

According to @PeckShieldAlert, the individual who previously exploited the GMX protocol has returned an additional 1,000 ETH, valued at approximately $3 million, to the GMX Security Committee's multisig address. This latest return brings the total value of assets held in the security wallet to $40.5 million. The wallet's holdings now include around 10,000 ETH and 10.5 million FRAX. For traders, the ongoing return of exploited funds is a significant positive indicator for the GMX protocol's integrity and financial stability, potentially strengthening investor confidence in the GMX token.

According to PeckShieldAlert, an exploiter has returned a significant amount of funds to the GMX protocol, totaling approximately $37.5 million. The returned assets include around 9,000 Ethereum (ETH) and 10.5 million FRAX stablecoins, which were transferred to the GMX Security Committee Multisig address. This fund recovery is a positive development for the GMX ecosystem, potentially restoring investor confidence and positively impacting the GMX token's price by mitigating the financial damage from the exploit.