Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
The most ridiculous heist in the crypto world? A hacker minted $1 billion worth of DOT tokens but only stole $230k.
Hackers exploited a vulnerability in the Hyperbridge cross-chain bridge to mint 1 billion DOT tokens out of thin air, with a face value of $1.19 billion. However, due to severe market liquidity shortages, they only cashed out about $237k.
Cryptocurrency attack incidents are happening frequently, but cases like this—“taking big risks for small gains”—are quite rare. Earlier today (13th), a hacker exploited a flaw in the Hyperbridge cross-chain bridge to mint 1 billion Polkadot (DOT) tokens on Ethereum, with a nominal value of $1.19 billion. Yet, when attempting to sell these tokens, they only managed to obtain about $237k worth of ETH due to liquidity issues.
It should be clarified that the attack targeted the “cross-chain bridge smart contract,” so the native DOT tokens on the Polkadot mainnet were not affected. The main cause of this vulnerability was that Hyperbridge’s EthereumHost contract failed to properly verify the authenticity of messages before passing cross-chain information to the TokenGateway.
Image source: X/@OnchainLens
Cross-chain bridges have always been the most vulnerable part of blockchain architecture because they hold management permissions over token contracts. Once the verification mechanism is compromised, hackers can easily gain the power to mint unlimited tokens.
Attack methods: forging messages, taking over management rights, unlimited minting
On-chain tracking shows that the hacker submitted a forged message via dispatchIncoming, successfully directing it to TokenGateway.onAccept. The system was supposed to verify the authenticity of this message based on the status on the Polkadot chain, but the verification mechanism recorded the promise value as “all zeros,” meaning the verification process was completely bypassed or nonexistent. As a result, the system mistakenly treated this fake message as a legitimate command.
The accepted message immediately executed the changeAdmin function on the bridge’s Polkadot token contract, transferring admin rights to the attacker’s address. After gaining management control, the attacker minted 1 billion DOT tokens in a single transaction. Using Odos Router V3, they deposited these tokens into the DOT-ETH liquidity pool on Uniswap V4, performing multiple swaps at slightly different prices. Ultimately, they withdrew about 108.2 ETH.
“Liquidity shortage” becomes a protective shield
In financial markets, “liquidity shortage” is usually a headache for whales and large traders. Ironically, in this case, the liquidity shortage became an invisible shield, greatly limiting the hacker’s profit potential.
Because the liquidity depth of DOT on Ethereum is extremely limited, it cannot absorb the 1 billion tokens minted out of thin air. When the hacker rushed to sell and cash out, severe slippage caused the actual price per token to fall below 1 cent.
In a bridge with deeper liquidity or higher value assets, the same vulnerability could cause losses dozens of times greater. As of writing, DOT’s trading price is about $1.17, down 5% in the past 24 hours.
This incident again demonstrates that even if hackers have “unlimited minting rights,” whether they can successfully arbitrage depends ultimately on market liquidity and trading depth. The well-known blockchain security firm CertiK later confirmed the attack and stated that the hacker profited approximately $237k by minting and selling the bridged tokens.
As of now, Hyperbridge has not issued any public statement regarding the hacker incident.
Image source: X/@CertiKAlert