hodler

5 Jun 2026, 18:02

AI exposed a massive flaw in top crypto network and experts warn banks could be next

After an AI model helped uncover a four-year-old flaw in Zcash, security researchers warn that similar bugs may be hiding across crypto and traditional financial systems.

5 Jun 2026, 16:15

Bitcoin Dives Below $60K Following Strong Jobs Data, Zcash Crash Shaking Crypto Confidence

Bitcoin has now fallen more than 50% from its October peak, dipping below $60,000 as the crypto industry reckons with the Zcash vulnerability.

5 Jun 2026, 13:20

DTXT/USDT Pair on BNB Chain Exploited for $35,000 in Smart Contract Attack

BitcoinWorld DTXT/USDT Pair on BNB Chain Exploited for $35,000 in Smart Contract Attack A security breach on the BNB Chain has resulted in the loss of approximately $35,041 from the DTXT/USDT liquidity pool, according to blockchain security firm PeckShield. The incident, which targeted a vulnerability in the DTXT token contract, highlights ongoing risks within decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols, particularly those involving complex smart contract logic. How the Exploit Worked PeckShield’s analysis reveals that the core of the exploit lay in a flawed mechanism within the DTXT contract. The contract determined the type of transaction—whether a swap or a liquidity addition—by comparing its own USDT balance with the amount of USDT deposited into the trading pair. The attacker exploited this by sending a small amount of USDT directly to the trading pair’s contract address. This manipulation caused a large sell order of DTXT tokens to be misidentified as a liquidity addition, effectively bypassing the transaction fee logic that would normally apply to a sell order. To execute the attack, the exploiter took out a flash loan of 1,077,400 USDT from the Moolah lending protocol. This capital was used to manipulate the pool’s state and execute the profitable trade, netting a profit of roughly 35,000 USDT. Flash loans, which allow borrowing without collateral provided the funds are returned within a single transaction block, are a common tool in DeFi exploits. Implications for DeFi Security This incident serves as a technical case study in how subtle logical errors in smart contracts can be weaponized. The vulnerability was not in the core trading logic of the decentralized exchange itself, but in the DTXT token’s custom contract code. This underscores a critical point for developers: custom token integrations, especially those with non-standard logic for handling fees or balance checks, require rigorous auditing and testing. What Users Should Know For liquidity providers in the DTXT/USDT pool, this event directly resulted in a loss of funds. It is a stark reminder that impermanent loss is not the only risk in DeFi; smart contract risk is ever-present. Users are advised to verify the audit history and code quality of any token project before providing liquidity. The use of flash loans in this attack also reinforces the need for protocols to design systems that are resilient to such capital-intensive manipulation. Conclusion The $35,000 exploit of the DTXT/USDT pool on BNB Chain is a clear example of how a single flawed line of logic in a token contract can lead to significant financial loss. While the sum is relatively small compared to multi-million dollar hacks, the technical method used is instructive for the broader DeFi community. As PeckShield continues to monitor the situation, the incident adds to the growing list of attacks that exploit the gap between intended contract behavior and actual execution. FAQs Q1: What exactly was the vulnerability in the DTXT contract? The contract used a flawed method to determine transaction types by comparing its USDT balance with the pool’s deposits. This allowed an attacker to trick the system into treating a large sell order as a liquidity addition, bypassing sell fees. Q2: How did the attacker profit from this exploit? The attacker used a flash loan of over 1 million USDT from Moolah to manipulate the pool’s state. By exploiting the logic flaw, they executed a trade that netted them a profit of approximately 35,000 USDT. Q3: Are funds safe on BNB Chain after this incident? This was a specific attack on the DTXT token contract, not a vulnerability in the BNB Chain itself. The chain remains secure, but users should exercise caution with any token that has custom or unaudited smart contract logic. This post DTXT/USDT Pair on BNB Chain Exploited for $35,000 in Smart Contract Attack first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

5 Jun 2026, 12:49

Morning Minute: Massive ZCash Exploit Found by Claude, Extent Unknown

The ZCash team hired a hacker to find an exploit in the ZCash protocol, and he exposed a glitch that has been out there for four years.

5 Jun 2026, 12:46

Will Zcash (ZEC) price crash below $100 dollars in 2026?

As Zcash ( ZEC ) price plunged over 40% over the past two days, the fear of a potential crash below $100 remained palpable. As of June 5, prediction market traders set the likelihood of the ZEC price crashing to $100 in 2026 at 28%, down 19% over the last 24 hours, according to data from Polymarket , as analyzed by Finbold. As of press time, the contract on the ZEC price hitting $100 in 2026 had a trading volume of $20,508. Contract for Zcash 2026 prediction. Source: Polymarket Additionally, prediction market traders believe the odds of Zcash’s price falling further to $50 before the end of this year are 19%, down 31% over the past 24 hours. Notably, the contract for the ZEC price to reach $50 in 2026 had a trading volume of approximately $10,101. Meanwhile, Polymarket traders believe there is a 22% and 18% chance that the Zcash price will surge to $700 and $800, respectively, by the end of 2026. Why are traders bearish on Zcash price in 2026? Crypto traders see the odds of Zcash’s price crashing below $100 in 2026 following the discovery of a bug that could have been used to create undetectable ZEC counterfeit. Zcash founder Zooko Wilcox said security researcher Taylor Hornby discovered a critical counterfeiting vulnerability in Zcash’s Orchard pool on May 29. However, the Zcash Open Development Lab coordinated an emergency response that was completed on June 2. Nonetheless, given that the bug had existed from 2022 until it was recently discovered, ZEC holders fear it may have been compromised to print more tokens. ZEC/USD 30-day chart. Source: Finbold With the ZEC price struggling to rally above $680 over the past 30 days, its near-term bearish sentiment has surged. Furthermore, the token has confirmed a possible head-and-shoulders pattern following its recent capitulation. The post Will Zcash (ZEC) price crash below $100 dollars in 2026? appeared first on Finbold .

5 Jun 2026, 12:00

Arthur Hayes Dumps Entire Zcash Bag, Keeps WLD Bet Alive

Arthur Hayes says Maelstrom has sold its entire Zcash position after new disclosures around the Orchard Pool vulnerability sharpened the perceived risk around ZEC’s monetary integrity. The move effectively ends his recent “Holy Trinity” trade across ZEC, NEAR and HYPE, while leaving Worldcoin as the AI-linked bet he says the fund still holds. “The Holy Trinity is dead,” Hayes wrote on X. “Sadly due to the Orchard Pool exploit, I had to dump our entire ZEC bag.” Why Is Hayes Dumping Zcash Now? The post followed a detailed statement from Zooko Wilcox, Jason McGee and Taylor Hornby, who described the issue as “The Orchard Counterfeiting Vulnerability.” According to their summary, Hornby discovered a critical vulnerability in Zcash’s Orchard pool on May 29 and disclosed it to Zcash Open Development Lab, which then coordinated an emergency response completed on June 2. The key line was stark: the vulnerability “could have been exploited to undetectably create an unlimited amount of counterfeit ZEC within Orchard.” Related Reading: Zcash Fixes Critical Orchard Vulnerability As ZEC Holds $600 Support That disclosure changed the market framing. Earlier ecosystem messaging had emphasized that the vulnerability had been remediated, that there was no evidence of exploitation, and that user funds remained safe. But Wilcox, McGee and Hornby added an important caveat: because of Orchard’s privacy properties, there is no way to cryptographically prove whether the vulnerability was exploited while it existed. That distinction sits at the center of Hayes’ decision to exit. “While I think it’s extremely unlikely of any minting, it cannot be formally cryptographically proved impossible,” Hayes wrote. “The privacy from AI, govt, big tech narrative demands perfection not improbability. I read about the exploit yday, and didn’t appreciate how it violated my narrative mental map.” Josh Swihart, founder and CEO of Zcash Open Development Lab, offered his own explanation in a post titled “Never Again.” He described the Orchard bug as a failure in one of the system’s rules: the rule was written loosely enough that it could accept false information and still pass. In other words, the problem was not a privacy leak but a soundness failure in the proof system, the kind of issue that can undermine confidence in whether invalid value creation was possible inside a shielded pool. The emergency fix required coordinated network action rather than a simple wallet or application patch. ZODL and the broader Zcash ecosystem moved to disable Orchard actions temporarily and then restore them with a corrected circuit. The remediation may have closed the vulnerability, but for a privacy asset, the reputational damage came from the residual uncertainty: no evidence of counterfeiting is not the same as a cryptographic proof that counterfeiting never occurred. Related Reading: Zcash (ZEC) Soars To Six-Month Highs After 110% Rally – Can It Break The $700 Barrier? Hayes said the roughly 30% selloff in ZEC forced him to reassess the position. “The 30% dump made me rethink, and I had to take profit on the entire position,” he wrote. His stated logic was not that exploitation had happened, but that the privacy thesis he had attached to ZEC required a higher standard than probabilistic reassurance. The sale completes a rapid reversal from Hayes’ May 22 “Holy Trinity” call, when he grouped HYPE, ZEC and NEAR as a three-token basket. “When you are in position, trading is easy, sit back and watch number go up,” he wrote at the time, naming “HYPE, ZEC, NEAR the holy trinity.” HYPE represented the on-chain derivatives and protocol revenue trade, NEAR the AI and chain-abstraction angle, and ZEC the privacy leg. A day before the ZEC sale, Hayes had already said he dumped his entire HYPE and NEAR positions, citing higher energy prices, looming major AI IPOs and political risk around artificial intelligence as reasons for taking profit. Still, Hayes did not close the door on Zcash. “We will consistently re-evaluate our thinking and if my assumptions are proven incorrect, will rebuy, hopefully at lower prices,” he wrote. “Privacy is priceless and I have no issue eating humble pie and rebuying much higher.” For now, Worldcoin is the remaining public expression of his AI-linked rotation. “We still hold WLD and are excited for Lord Elon to pump our bags,” Hayes added. That follows his recent public call for a WLD bull market, linking the move to renewed speculation around AI assets and an OpenAI IPO. At press time, ZEC was down more than 45% in 24 hours. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com