Possible BNB Chain exploit sees $80K in BTC lost

A recent incident on the BNB Chain has resulted in the loss of approximately $80,000 worth of Bitcoin (BTC) due to a potential exploit involving a series of suspicious transactions. While the amount may seem small compared to typical crypto exploits, the attacker’s identity and intentions have come under scrutiny.

According to on-chain security firm Cyvers, the exploited token contract remains unknown, but the attacker’s behavior suggests they might be a white hat hacker. White hat hackers, also known as ethical hackers, use their skills to identify security vulnerabilities and report them to the affected parties.

Cyvers noted in a May 28 post on X that the attacker received funding through the cryptocurrency mixing service Tornado Cash, which is often associated with malicious actors seeking to obfuscate the origin of their funds. However, the attacker also interacted with Binance, the world’s largest centralized exchange, which requires users to complete a KYC (Know Your Customer) verification process.

This interaction with Binance has led some to believe that the attacker may not have malicious intentions, as sophisticated hackers typically avoid centralized exchanges to maintain their anonymity and avoid getting caught.

The potential BNB Chain exploit comes on the heels of another incident involving Gala Games , which lost $23 million worth of Gala (GALA) tokens due to an internal control issue. Surprisingly, the hacker returned $22.3 million worth of Ether (ETH) after their wallet was frozen with the stolen funds.

Gala Games co-founder and CEO Eric Schiermeyer revealed that the alleged attacker had been identified, including their home address, which may have prompted the unexpected return of the stolen funds.

Similarly, earlier in May, an unknown attacker returned $71 million worth of crypto stolen from a wallet poisoning attack after the high-profile incident attracted attention from multiple blockchain investigation firms, prompting Binance to develop an algorithm to counter such attacks. While initially thought to be an ethical hacker, onchain transactions suggest that the attacker in the was likely a malicious actor who became concerned about the increased scrutiny and decided to return the funds.