Recently, I saw someone treat cross-chain bridges as "ATMs" again, and I really don't understand... Multi-signature is not a talisman; if the signers are the same people / the same machine / the same message channel, then any incident is a collective failure; oracles are not just "glance at the price," feeding incorrect data means waiting for a thousand confirmations is useless. Speaking of "waiting for confirmation," its real meaning is simply: giving you time to notice something's wrong, allowing the finality on the chain to stabilize, not to boost your confidence to bet that the other side won't roll back. By the way, I want to complain that now public opinion always forcefully links ETF capital flows and US stock market risk appetite to explain crypto price movements, as if a macro change automatically makes bridges safe... Anyway, I always check the mechanism before bridging; if I can avoid bridging, I do. The transaction fees on the bridge can't save your life.