Three thousand dollars, versus seventy billion. A report from CoinDesk today.

A server, rental fee $3,000. A group of white-hat hackers used it to find a vulnerability. This vulnerability could theoretically threaten $70 billion in crypto assets.
Three thousand, versus seventy billion. Between attack cost and exposed assets, there's a difference of seven orders of magnitude. Details of the report are still coming out — which part, how it was fixed — we'll add more once the information is complete.
Today, just focus on this ratio itself. The security account in this industry has always been calculated like this. On the attacking side: one machine, a few people, a few weeks. On the defending side: tens of billions in assets, millions of lines of code, and countless corners where one wrong move leads to total loss.
Good news: This time the vulnerability was found by white-hats; they disclosed first, then patched. No money lost. Bad news: There's no reason to assume others can't find what white-hats can find with $3,000.
Last week, BNB Chain tested a quantum-safe solution, throughput dropped by 40%. CZ is arguing over whether to freeze Satoshi's coins. Today comes another $3,000 server.
These things may seem unrelated, but underneath is the same fact: the money managed by this industry grows faster than the technology guarding it. No uncertainty, no scare tactics. Just remember this ratio: three thousand, versus seventy billion.