Mint Club's Hacking Incident and Compensation plan!
Last Week, there was a mass dumping of Mint Club's main tokens, MINT, MINTDAO, and MINTGRANT tokens. To begin with, the token dumping incident has nothing to do with the Mint Club team (hunt team) and is a problem that was caused entirely by the negligence of the Nutbox team.
In addition, this dumping incident is not an unexpected hacking attack on smart contract errors, and the cause of the problem is summarized as one of key leakage due to poor admin key storage or the breach/embezzlement of nutbox insiders.
Nutbox is a DeFi platform that can be used to mine TRC-20 tokens called PNUT by renting Steem power or supplying liquidity based on Steem and Tron.
Nutbox had plans to expand not only to Steem and Tron, but also to Polkadot and Binance smart chain ecosystems, and recently launched a farming pool that can mine NUT (Walnut), a BSC-based BEP-20 token.
For the victims of the Mint hacking incident, the hunt team is converting company cash funds into BNB and giving them to the victims in BNB.
The Nutbox team has decided to pay 20 million NUT, which is 20% of the team's NUT, but it is not yet listed or traded, and people are not convinced that the lock-up is gradually released over 5 years.
Accordingly, Nutbox decided to pay an additional 2 million NUTs, and to reduce the total distribution period of 20 million NUT in damages from 5 years to 3 years.
It's a disappointing response, but I hope that both teams will revive in the end. After mentioning the first compensation plan, as the backlash from the victims grew stronger, the amount of compensation was added by 10% and the distribution period was revised to reduce the distribution period from 5 years to 3 years.
Seeing such a response, I was reminded of the nonsensical creative and economic response that offered an exchange option only by issuing a token called RAIL after Coinrail was hacked in 2018. Coinrail arbitrarily set the standard price by determining the price of RAIL tokens that are not traded in the market at certain price.
The Nutbox team also said that the amount of NUT token compensation was calculated based on the value of the amount of damage suffered by the victims. The current response seems to be no different from Coinrail, which thinks that Señorage, which can print money whenever necessary, is possible in the cryptocurrency market.
In addition, the fact that the lock-up release conditions applied to the team allocation are the same as those applied, but then shortened the lock-up release period to 3 years is proof that the conditions can be changed.
What has already happened is inevitable. You just need to decide how to lose the cow and fix the barn. In particular, in my memory, there are many precedents for projects that were hacked and then revived due to flaws in smart contracts, but none of them were revived after their admin key was stolen (even if it wasn't a real insider embezzlement).
In other words, NUT is already a project that starts losing trust in the market even before it starts, and I personally expect the probability of success to converge to zero.
First of all, let's be clear, the ambassador is not a nutbox team, but only a bridging role that helps publicity. However, it is somewhat unfortunate that the fire seems to have been ignited by the rather radical response to people's dissatisfaction and criticism afterward.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
