Scan to download
BTC $61,418.10 +0.53%
ETH $1,589.45 +0.40%
BNB $579.07 +0.20%
XRP $1.12 +2.00%
SOL $63.43 -0.31%
TRX $0.3239 +1.18%
DOGE $0.0834 +1.97%
ADA $0.1608 +2.36%
BCH $218.47 +2.13%
LINK $7.56 +2.78%
HYPE $57.76 -3.34%
AAVE $62.34 +2.53%
SUI $0.7530 +7.27%
XLM $0.2131 +8.23%
ZEC $379.36 +0.03%
BTC $61,418.10 +0.53%
ETH $1,589.45 +0.40%
BNB $579.07 +0.20%
XRP $1.12 +2.00%
SOL $63.43 -0.31%
TRX $0.3239 +1.18%
DOGE $0.0834 +1.97%
ADA $0.1608 +2.36%
BCH $218.47 +2.13%
LINK $7.56 +2.78%
HYPE $57.76 -3.34%
AAVE $62.34 +2.53%
SUI $0.7530 +7.27%
XLM $0.2131 +8.23%
ZEC $379.36 +0.03%

ois

Superfortune: The leakage of the attacker's private key rather than address poisoning is not the work of an insider

Superfortune, incubated by Manta, recently released an update on the X platform regarding a security incident, stating that the attack was not carried out by internal personnel and that no team members were involved. The claim about the team secretly selling tokens is incorrect. The team has also not had any contact with Web3Port.The investigation confirmed that the attack was not due to address poisoning, but rather a leak of the signer's private key. The attacker independently held the private key and submitted a transaction with a forged address 43 minutes after the correct transaction. The forged address shares the first and last four characters with the correct address (starting with 0x70AE and ending with 5C15) to disguise itself in the Safe interface preview. The stolen funds are fully traceable and are currently stored in three cold wallets on Ethereum, containing approximately 2784 ETH, along with about 170,000 USDT that were cross-chain transferred out.The attacker also created a large number of counterfeit addresses and sent false transfer events to these addresses using Unicode-forged token symbols in an attempt to confuse tracking. This counterfeit address construction technique is the same as the method used when attacking this project. The attacker had pre-built a large-scale infrastructure, indicating that this was an industrialized operation rather than an opportunistic attack.

Expert: AI large model poisoning is a new form of unfair competition

According to China News Network, the "3·15" gala reported on the "poisoning" chaos of AI large models. Li Fumin, an expert from the Institute of Intelligent Social Governance at Shandong University of Finance and Economics, stated that the behavior of businesses conducting targeted training on large models through services like GEO to guide AI in generating specific product or service recommendations is essentially a new form of unfair competition and consumer misleading behavior that uses technical means for covert marketing and fabricating facts. This leads consumers to receive implanted marketing content without their knowledge, and its harmfulness and illegality need to be taken seriously.On one hand, the above behavior infringes upon the consumers' right to know and the right to fair trade as stipulated by the Consumer Rights Protection Law. On the other hand, it constitutes false or misleading commercial promotion using technical means, disrupting the normal order of recommendation algorithms and the market competition environment, thereby forming unfair competition.The governance of the above AI poisoning behavior requires a multi-faceted approach. Regulatory authorities should include AI-induced marketing in key monitoring and strengthen law enforcement supervision; AI operators should enhance the review of source materials and output filtering, and establish traceability mechanisms; consumers should improve their awareness of the commercial nature of AI-generated information and actively protect their rights through complaints and reports.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.