# Smart Contract Related Articles

HTX News Center provides the latest articles and in-depth analysis on "Smart Contract", covering market trends, project updates, tech developments, and regulatory policies in the crypto industry.

What's the Connection Between Pinduoduo's Huang Zheng and Blockchain?

This text explores the unexpected connection between Pinduoduo founder Colin Huang and blockchain, as suggested in his article *Turning Capitalism Upside Down*. Huang argues Pinduoduo's core business is about managing "uncertainty." He posits that wealth flows to the rich because they absorb life's uncertainties (e.g., illness, job loss) that devastate the poor, who pay a premium for certainty through insurance or stable prices. Pinduoduo's model attempts a "reverse insurance": by aggregating consumer demand via group-buying and flash sales, it creates a large, predictable order for manufacturers. This certainty allows factories to remove risk premiums, passing savings back as lower prices, thus partially reversing the wealth flow. The key obstacle, Huang notes, is that an individual's buying intent is an unreliable promise. He then asks if blockchain is the natural solution for this "reverse insurance." The text elaborates that blockchain, through smart contracts with binding deposits, could transform casual intent into a costly-to-break, enforceable commitment. This replaces interpersonal trust with coded rules, making promises credible, pricable, and resistant to fraud. Finally, the author draws a parallel to Bitcoin, framing two paths to creating certainty: the "Pinduoduo path" of aggregating decentralized will into scale, and the "Bitcoin path" of locking rules into immutable code. Both sacrifice something—personal freedom or system flexibility—to manufacture trust and predictability.

链捕手Yesterday 00:08

What's the Connection Between Pinduoduo's Huang Zheng and Blockchain?

链捕手Yesterday 00:08

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

**Raydium Exploit Reveals DeFi's Hidden Risk: Forgotten "Zombie" Contracts** A recent attack on Raydium's deprecated V3 AMM pools resulted in a loss of approximately $1.34 million. The hacker exploited pools that were no longer supported by Raydium's current UI or SDK but remained fully functional and accessible on-chain. This incident highlights a critical, often overlooked category of risk in DeFi: inactive or legacy smart contracts that projects fail to properly decommission. Since March 2025, there have been at least 8 publicly reported attacks targeting such abandoned contracts, with total losses around $10.8 million. Including older pools and deprecated features, the count rises to 10 incidents with roughly $22.5 million in losses. These "zombie contracts" represent a lifecycle management failure rather than a code vulnerability, yet they are typically misclassified under general "code bug" categories in security reports, masking the true scale of the problem. The root cause is that projects often merely document a contract as "deprecated" without taking essential technical steps to secure it: withdrawing remaining assets, disabling external call functions, and implementing ongoing monitoring. These forgotten, under-monitored components become prime targets for attackers. To address this, the industry needs to recognize "zombie contracts" as a distinct risk category and establish standardized decommissioning protocols. Essential steps should include: 1) a formal retirement announcement, 2) removal of all front-end integrations, 3) withdrawal of locked assets, 4) disabling key contract functions, 5) ongoing security monitoring, 6) clear user communication, and 7) a post-mortem analysis. The value of a DeFi project lies not only in its current TVL but also in the security of its historical codebase, which has now become a new attack surface.

Foresight News2 days ago 06:15

The Revelation from the Raydium Theft Incident: New DeFi Vulnerabilities Lurking in Forgotten Old Contracts

Foresight News2 days ago 06:15

Morse Code "Stole" $440,000 from Bankr, Undermining Trust in AI Agent Interactions Again

On May 20th, the AI agent platform Bankr reported an attack where 14 user wallets were compromised, resulting in losses exceeding $440,000. The incident, confirmed by security firm SlowMist, was a social engineering attack exploiting the trust layer between automated agents, similar to an attack on May 4th that stole $150k-$200k from a Grok-associated wallet. Bankr allows users and AI agents to manage wallets and execute transactions via instructions sent to @bankrbot on X. The platform monitors posts from specific agents like @grok, treating them as potential transaction commands, especially if the agent holds a "Bankr Club Membership" NFT which grants high-permission operations. The attacker exploited this design. First, they airdropped the required NFT to Grok's wallet. Then, they posted a Morse code message on X requesting a translation from Grok. The AI agent helpfully decoded and replied, but the decoded text contained a direct instruction to @bankrbot to transfer a large sum of DRB tokens to the attacker's address. Bankr's system, monitoring Grok's feed and verifying the NFT permissions, automatically signed and broadcast the transaction. The core issue is a flawed trust assumption: Bankr treated Grok's natural language output as authorized financial commands without verifying the intent. LLMs like Grok cannot distinguish between a genuine user request and a manipulated instruction. Using encoded messages like Morse code bypasses potential content filters, as the translation task itself appears harmless. This attack highlights a systemic vulnerability in platforms granting on-chain execution rights to AI agents. While Bankr has paused transactions and promised full reimbursement from its treasury, the incident underscores that defenses against "malicious-injection-via-LLM-output" were not part of the original security model. As AI agents gain financial agency, such trust-layer exploits represent a growing threat class.

marsbit05/20 03:32

Morse Code "Stole" $440,000 from Bankr, Undermining Trust in AI Agent Interactions Again

marsbit05/20 03:32

A Hair Dryer Blows Away $34,000 from Polymarket

A hairdryer was used to manipulate a temperature sensor at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport (LFPG) on April 6 and 15, 2026, causing short-lived artificial temperature spikes. These false readings were used to exploit a prediction market on Polymarket, where users bet on Paris’s daily maximum temperature. The attacker targeted low-probability high-temperature outcomes, which settled as "Yes" based on the corrupted data, netting a total of $34,000 in profit. The attacker’s a newly created anonymous account funded just two days before the first incident. After the successful manipulations, the funds were quickly moved through mixers and decentralized exchanges to avoid tracing. French meteorological experts and authorities confirmed the anomalies were inconsistent with actual weather conditions and nearby station data, pointing to physical intervention. Legal action was initiated for "disrupting automated data processing systems," which carries severe penalties under French law. Polymarket’s market rules relied solely on a single, publicly accessible sensor and did not account for subsequent data revisions, making the system vulnerable to such physical oracle attacks. In response, Polymarket silently switched its data source to Paris-Le Bourget Airport (LFPB) without public explanation or refunding the exploited funds. The incident highlights the risks of single-point data dependencies in prediction markets and the low-cost, high-reward potential of real-world manipulation.

marsbit04/23 08:28

A Hair Dryer Blows Away $34,000 from Polymarket

marsbit04/23 08:28

活动图片