hodler

1 Jun 2026, 12:36

XLM climbs 40 percent to $0.29 after DTCC deal

🚀 XLM soared 40.4 percent in 24 hours to $0.29 after DTCC tapped the network for its tokenized securities platform. Short-term crypto trends remained weak as most leading coins fell; bitcoin lost 1 percent and spot bitcoin ETFs saw $2.97 billion in outflows. 📈 Stellar became the first public blockchain chosen by the DTCC for multi-chain tokenization in $XLM. Continue Reading: XLM climbs 40 percent to $0.29 after DTCC deal The post XLM climbs 40 percent to $0.29 after DTCC deal appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .

1 Jun 2026, 12:00

Bitwise Adds $20M in HYPE in Single Day, Bolstering Hyperliquid ETF Holdings

BitcoinWorld Bitwise Adds $20M in HYPE in Single Day, Bolstering Hyperliquid ETF Holdings Bitwise Asset Management, the issuer of the Hyperliquid (HYPE) spot exchange-traded fund (ETF), purchased $20 million worth of HYPE tokens in a single day, according to data from blockchain analytics firm Arkham (ARKM). The acquisition, reported on Thursday, marks a significant acceleration in the firm’s accumulation of the token. Institutional Accumulation Accelerates Last week, Bitwise’s HYPE spot ETF, ticker BHYP, acquired a total of $41.8 million in HYPE. The latest single-day purchase of $20 million brings the fund’s total holdings to a substantial level, underscoring the growing institutional appetite for the Hyperliquid ecosystem. Arkham’s on-chain data revealed that Bitwise is currently staking approximately $55 million worth of the token, indicating a long-term holding strategy rather than short-term trading. ETF Performance Outshines Traditional Markets Arkham also noted that the return from purchasing BHYP at its launch two weeks ago has surpassed the S&P 500’s performance over the last two years. This comparison highlights the high volatility and potential upside of cryptocurrency ETFs relative to traditional equity indices, though it also carries corresponding risks. The BHYP ETF provides investors with regulated exposure to HYPE without the need to directly custody or manage the digital asset. Implications for the Hyperliquid Ecosystem Bitwise’s aggressive accumulation signals confidence in Hyperliquid’s underlying technology and market position. Hyperliquid is a decentralized derivatives exchange built on its own layer-1 blockchain, offering high-speed trading and staking rewards. The staking of $55 million in HYPE by a major asset manager like Bitwise adds credibility to the network’s security model and may encourage further institutional participation. For retail investors, the BHYP ETF offers a simpler entry point into a complex DeFi ecosystem, potentially broadening the investor base for HYPE. Conclusion Bitwise’s $20 million single-day HYPE purchase, part of a larger $41.8 million weekly accumulation, demonstrates sustained institutional demand for the Hyperliquid ecosystem. With $55 million currently staked and ETF returns outperforming the S&P 500, the move reflects a strategic bet on the long-term value of decentralized finance infrastructure. Investors should remain aware of the inherent volatility and regulatory uncertainties surrounding digital asset ETFs. FAQs Q1: What is the BHYP ETF? BHYP is a spot exchange-traded fund issued by Bitwise Asset Management that tracks the price of Hyperliquid (HYPE) tokens. It allows investors to gain exposure to HYPE through a traditional brokerage account without directly holding the cryptocurrency. Q2: Why is Bitwise staking HYPE tokens? Staking involves locking up tokens to support the network’s operations, such as validating transactions and securing the blockchain. In return, stakers earn rewards. Bitwise’s staking of $55 million in HYPE suggests a long-term investment strategy and confidence in the Hyperliquid network’s security and yield generation. Q3: How does BHYP’s performance compare to the S&P 500? According to Arkham, the return from purchasing BHYP at its launch two weeks ago has exceeded the S&P 500’s total return over the last two years. However, this comparison reflects a very short time frame for BHYP versus a multi-year period for the S&P 500, and cryptocurrency ETFs are generally much more volatile than traditional index funds. This post Bitwise Adds $20M in HYPE in Single Day, Bolstering Hyperliquid ETF Holdings first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

1 Jun 2026, 11:30

Base’s state update system went down and nobody noticed

A bug inside Coinbase’s Base froze a critical part of the network’s infrastructure. It has raised fresh questions around the resilience of Ethereum’s growing Layer-2 ecosystem. However, the issue did not stop users from sending transactions or interacting with applications on Base. Blocks reportedly continued to be produced and the network appeared to function normally. But behind the scenes, a key component which aws responsible for updating Base’s state on Ether stalled for more than 30 hours. This event came to notice after developers flagged that the state updates and withdrawals to Ether were stopped. Base’s 30-hour glitch raised layer-2 concerns Developer donnoh.eth addressed the issue in an X post. He noted that the outage went unnoticed because Base withdrawals already require a seven-day challenge period. He stated that “It’s kind of crazy that Base state updates have been down for over 30 hours now because of some bug related to the recent upgrade and no one even noticed just because withdrawals take seven days anyway.” According to Base’s status page , the problem was traced to the network’s Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) enclave. The malfunction prevented the proposal system from generating the state updates needed to anchor Base’s activity back to Ethereum. The chain kept itself processing and was moving transactions normally. Meanwhile, Base’s state effectively stopped updating until the issue was resolved. In the case of rollup like Base, transitions are executed on L2 before compressed state commitments are periodically posted back to Ether. The TEE helps to generate cryptographic attestations. This helps in proving that state transitions were computed correctly. This suggests that when that system stops working, users can continue transacting on Layer 2. Meanwhile, the settlement pipeline connecting the network back to Ethereum can grind to a halt. No funds were lost and the outage did not expose user assets to theft. But still, it did temporarily freeze one of the most important pieces of infrastructure supporting the rollup. It stands crucial that, as it happened just a few days after Base deployed its Azul upgrade. It was designed to improve scalability and reportedly increase throughput to as much as 5,000 transactions per second. Despite this, the network found itself struggling. Base and Sui face different failure modes Earlier this year, Base saw periods of transaction delays during heavy network activity. However, those issues never halted settlements. Yet, they exposed capacity constraints as usage continued growing. Base is not alone that faced this problem. Sui reported a consensus failure that disrupted transaction processing for roughly six hours in January. The network experienced multiple outages tied to software bugs introduced during protocol upgrades. It temporarily freezes transfers, DeFi activity, and NFT transactions. The tech involved behind those incidents are very different. Base saw outage that involved a TEE-assisted proving mechanism. On the other side, Sui’s problems emerged from validator consensus and gas-accounting logic. The smartest crypto minds already read our newsletter. Want in? Join them .

1 Jun 2026, 10:50

Sui Explains What Caused Its Three Consecutive Mainnet Disruptions

Sui experienced three mainnet outages on May 28 and May 29 tied to its v1.72 release. Two halts came from a gas-charging bug exposed by the new address balances feature. The third halt followed a latent randomness bug triggered during validator restarts. The Sui Foundation published its full review of the three mainnet outages that knocked the network offline across May 28 and May 29, 2026. The firm claimed that the disruptions were caused by two distinct bugs in the v1.72 software release. The post-mortem confirmed that the first two halts shared the same root cause, while a third halt was triggered by a latent randomness-state bug exposed during validator restarts. The first outage began at around 7 a.m. PT on Thursday, May 28, and ended at about 1:30 p.m. PT the same day. The second halt ran from roughly 5 a.m. PT to 8:30 a.m. PT on Friday, May 29. The third outage began at around 1:30 p.m. PT on Friday and ended at about 7:20 p.m. PT. The Foundation said no user funds were at risk across the three events and the network did not revert any committed transactions when it resumed. SUI , the network’s native token, trades at $0.8776, down 2.6 percent on the day, 15.7 percent over the past week, and 73.0 percent over the past year. Gas-Charging Bug Drove the First Two Sui Outages The v1.72 release added a feature called address balances, which gives users a new way to store funds and pay for gas without using coin objects. Sui transactions can now pay for gas using an address balance on its own, coin objects, or a mix of both, which the team calls hybrid gas. For transactions paying with coin objects or hybrid gas, the runtime performs gas smashing before charging the transaction. The process combines all input coins into a single coin that is then debited for gas. The step runs for transactions that execute successfully and for transactions that are cancelled. The root cause of the first two outages sat at an edge case inside the hybrid gas path. If a reservation attempted to overdraft an address balance during the budget check, the attempt was blocked and the transaction was cancelled with an InsufficientFundsForWithdraw error. The Foundation said the crash did not happen during gas smashing itself. Using an address balance in a transaction emits balance deltas that are reconciled by a system settlement transaction. The crash came from a negative delta produced by the cancelled-but-still-smashed gas being applied to a zero balance during settlement. The condition could only happen when two transactions hit the scheduler at the same time and competed to spend funds from an address balance that could not cover both. The scheduler cancels one of them with InsufficientFundsForWithdraw to prevent the overdraft, but the cancelled transaction still debited funds through gas smashing. Interim Fix Came With a Known Risk That Triggered the Second Halt The fix the core team proposed on Thursday afternoon stopped the system from smashing gas when a transaction was cancelled with InsufficientFundsForWithdraw. Enough validators adopted the patch to bring the network back at about 1:30 p.m. PT, with the team accepting a known risk attached to the interim approach. The Foundation said gas logic changes are delicate work. Address balances interact with coins in complicated ways. Changes must either preserve all previous behavior or apply version gating, since nodes can fork while replaying old transactions under new logic. Sui’s gas charging also includes conservation checks that prevent any transaction from creating or destroying SUI. Skipping the step that credits any charged funds to the appropriate place would cause a crash. Charging expensive transactions also serves as a key piece of denial-of-service protection. The interim fix had a shortcoming that the team flagged when it shipped. A transaction can carry multiple reasons for cancellation, and one reason can override the others. A transaction using address balances might be cancelled because too many higher-priority transactions are queuing to touch the same hot shared object, then also be cancelled for InsufficientFundsForWithdraw when another transaction spends from the same address balance. In that scenario, the InsufficientFundsForWithdraw error gets masked by the other error, bypassing the patch and triggering the same underflow. That exact scenario hit the network on Friday morning, leading to the second outage. The team was close to completing a more durable fix at the time and finished in time to propose the new patch to validators by about 8 a.m. PT. Enough validators adopted it to bring Sui back up by 9:40 a.m. PT. Randomness State Bug Caused the Third Sui Halt The network ran normally from 9:40 a.m. PT until about 1:30 p.m. PT on Friday, when the scheduled epoch change failed to complete and the network halted a third time. The Foundation said the third halt came from a latent bug whose conditions were set by the previous restart cycle. At the start of each epoch, Sui validators run a distributed key generation, or DKG, protocol that bootstraps the random beacon used by transactions that depend on on-chain randomness. The DKG requires a higher participation threshold than normal consensus. If participation falls short, randomness disables itself for the rest of the epoch as designed. When validators restarted to install the Friday morning fix, participation for the next epoch’s DKG was not high enough, and the protocol disabled itself. The latent bug meant the failure verdict was never written to disk. As further restarts followed, each validator came back up unaware that DKG had failed. Randomness-dependent transactions expect to either execute or be cancelled. With validators no longer holding the record that DKG had failed, neither could happen. The paused queue grew, and the end-of-epoch logic, which has to drain that queue before closing, was left waiting on a DKG that would never arrive. The fix carried two parts. The first piece corrected the bug and added logic to persist DKG status across restarts. The second piece added a mechanism that lets validators close a stuck epoch at a coordinated point. The team used the new mechanism once to close the affected epoch. The network then moved into the new epoch normally, and randomness was restored. What the Sui Team Took From the Three Outages The foundation set out four takeaways from the week. End-of-epoch resilience was the first, with the team noting that the existing safe-mode fallback for epoch transitions may be too narrow. The Foundation said the ecosystem needs to extend graceful-degradation patterns across the rest of the reconfiguration path and turn the force-close mechanism into a standing operational capability. The second takeaway covered the gas-charging logic itself. The crashes in parts one and two both stemmed from bugs in gas charging, a corner of execution that interacts with the address-balance settlement system, conservation checks, and the scheduler. The team said the logic is now complex enough that edge cases are hard to rule out by inspection alone. Coming out of the incident, the Foundation said gas charging deserves the same code-quality bar as the Move VM or the Mysticeti consensus engine. The third takeaway covered AI tooling. AI agents with access to production state, capable of querying validator logs interactively, inspecting cluster state, and assembling metrics on demand, materially accelerated diagnosis during the week’s incidents. The fourth takeaway covered failure containment. The crashes in the first two outages were each triggered by specific inputs the validators could not process safely. The Foundation said the system lacks a defense-in-depth layer that would bound the blast radius of such a crash. 

1 Jun 2026, 10:50

Crypto players lose $68.3 million to exploits and scams in May 2026

The crypto industry lost approximately $68.3 million to exploits and scams across 60 confirmed incidents in May 2026, according to the latest monthly report from blockchain security firm CertiK. The figure brings the month in as the third in 2026 where monthly losses were under $100 million. Phishing alone accounts for around $2.6 million of the total. Funds returned across the same period reached $9.38 million, partially offsetting the gross loss figure. The May numbers come in well below the heavy April losses . Crypto sector records 60 incidents across May The CertiK report counted 60 separate incidents through the month, the highest monthly count of 2026 so far. The figure runs above the 50 incidents seen in February, the 55 logged in March, and the 58 recorded in April. The January count had been 48 incidents. #CertiKStatsAlert 🚨 Combining all the incidents in May we’ve confirmed ~$68.3M lost to exploits with ~$2.6M of the total attributed to phishing. After a particularly bad April, May is now the third month of 2026 to record losses under 100M$. More details below 👇 pic.twitter.com/GSWTLKXWDH — CertiK Alert (@CertiKAlert) May 31, 2026 Total May losses came in at the $68.3 million figure, lower than April’s $547.3 million and below the $97 million logged in January. February and March had also recorded losses under $100 million and March posted the lowest dollar figure of the year so far at $38 million. Phishing losses moderated through the month at $2.6 million, the second-lowest figure of 2026 to date. January had posted $331.3 million in phishing losses, with February at $86.1 million and March at $21.6 million. The April phishing figure had fallen to $7.5 million before the May reading. Verus and Thorchain lead the monthly loss list The Verus attack was rated first in terms of monthly losses at $11.52 million, while the Thorchain attack was second at $10.12 million, and both attacks comprised almost one-third of the monthly total. Third, fourth, and fifth spots in the list of greatest loss incidents went to TrustedVolumes at $6.58 million, Victim 0x2cFED at $5.94 million, and Gravity Bridge at $5.40 million. All five biggest incidents in the period under analysis brought total losses amounting to $39.55 million, almost half of the total loss figure. A number of less significant incidents made up the rest of the top ten by losses. Stablr incurred monthly losses at $3.50 million, while New Market Trading suffered losses totaling $3.10 million. TAC, Ossie, and Haveno/RetoSwap all had losses at $2.80 million and $2.70 million. Code vulnerabilities drive crypto losses by category By category, code vulnerabilities accounted for $45.13 million of the monthly losses, equal to around 66 percent of the total. Wallet compromises followed at $13.77 million, with validator compromises at $5.40 million and phishing at $2.66 million. Backend incidents posted the smallest category figure at $0.82 million in losses. The category breakdown points to smart contract code as the main attack surface during the month. The dominance of code vulnerabilities runs against the pattern seen in some earlier months of 2026. January’s hardware wallet hack of $282 million had been a wallet compromise, while April’s Drift Protocol breach of $285 million had run on social engineering against admin keys. By incident type, bridge exploits drew the largest dollar figure at $28.62 million. DeFi protocol incidents came in second at $23.92 million, with meme token incidents at $1.34 million and exchange-related losses at $1.09 million. Unverified contract incidents added $0.74 million to the monthly total. Funds returned total $9.38 million against gross losses The May report also tracked recoveries across the month. Funds returned came to $9.38 million against the $68.3 million in gross losses, equal to around a 13.7 percent recovery rate. This is in line with a trend emerging across 2026 where certain compromised projects have succeeded in recovering some amounts of funds that were stolen. From the KelpDAO bridge hack in April, where Arbitrum froze about $75 million out of the $292 million stolen, along with law enforcement efforts, to Operation Atlantic that disrupted the flow of about $45 million from cryptocurrency scams. As per the May report, the total losses incurred during 2026 up to the end of May amount to almost $1.3 billion, with April having accounted for nearly half of that loss amount itself. If you're reading this, you’re already ahead. Stay there with our newsletter .

1 Jun 2026, 10:46

Cardano Summit 2026 canceled after community votes against Foundation funding proposal

The Cardano Foundation's flagship conference was scrapped after a funding proposal failed to secure the two-thirds support required under the blockchain's new governance system.