The next billion-dollar DeFi exploit probably won’t come from a coding mistake

It’ll come from a design decision
We’ve reached a point where many of the largest protocols undergo multiple smart contract audits before launch
Yet protocols still lose millions
Why?
Because not every exploit starts with broken code
Some start with broken assumptions
Governance attacks exploit how decisions are made
Oracle attacks exploit how protocols interpret price data
The code may execute exactly as intended
But the design is what gets manipulated
That’s why an audited protocol isn’t automatically a secure protocol
A protocol can have flawless smart contracts and still lose millions if its governance can be captured or its oracle can be manipulated
Security is no longer just about asking,
“Has the code been audited?”
It’s also about asking,
“What assumptions does this protocol rely on?”
Because those assumptions eventually become attack surfaces
The next major exploit may not expose a new vulnerability
It may simply expose another design choice the industry underestimated
As DeFi matures, protocol design may become just as important as protocol code
Which do you think is the bigger risk today: insecure code or insecure protocol design?