BTC $78,481.16 -0.57%
ETH $2,472.53 +0.44%
BNB $699.56 +0.29%
XRP $1.38 -5.77%
SOL $96.69 -1.11%
TRX $0.3356 -0.85%
DOGE $0.0849 -3.48%
ADA $0.2057 -3.88%
BCH $262.25 -1.67%
LINK $11.32 -1.30%
HYPE $81.00 -0.62%
AAVE $123.69 -3.12%
SUI $0.7392 -4.64%
XLM $0.1802 -4.54%
ZEC $783.22 -0.35%
BTC $78,481.16 -0.57%
ETH $2,472.53 +0.44%
BNB $699.56 +0.29%
XRP $1.38 -5.77%
SOL $96.69 -1.11%
TRX $0.3356 -0.85%
DOGE $0.0849 -3.48%
ADA $0.2057 -3.88%
BCH $262.25 -1.67%
LINK $11.32 -1.30%
HYPE $81.00 -0.62%
AAVE $123.69 -3.12%
SUI $0.7392 -4.64%
XLM $0.1802 -4.54%
ZEC $783.22 -0.35%

cati

All
Article
Flash

first_img Unstoppable Domains abandons ICANN application, refunds Web3 domain names

Matthew Gould, the founder of Unstoppable Domains, stated that the company did not submit an application for its Web3 top-level domains in ICANN's 2026 expansion round and will refund customers who purchased related domains. Gould mentioned that the compliance, application, and bidding costs of incorporating Web3 domains into the ICANN system exceeded the company's expected recoverable sales. This move ends the company's commitment since 2019 that domains like .crypto and .wallet would eventually be resolvable in standard browsers.The application window for this round of ICANN opened on April 30 and closed on August 12, receiving over 1,600 major applications. Gould stated that customers have been notified via email, but the list of affected extensions and refund terms have not been disclosed. Some holders questioned the scope of the refunds, claiming they held the domains based on Unstoppable's commitment to advance the ICANN application. Gould responded that Web3 domains will still serve as on-chain assets for cryptocurrency transactions.Unstoppable continues to participate in ICANN activities as a service provider and previously announced a partnership with Telegram to apply for the .gram domain. Meanwhile, ENS has chosen a different path, with token holders approving the restructuring of the ENS Foundation to pursue the .ens top-level domain in ICANN, but ENS will not apply for .eth, as it is reserved for ISO 3166-1 country codes.

Slow Mist Reveals Details of the Allbridge Cross-Chain Bridge Attack: Forged CCTP Messages, Flash Loans, Insufficient Minting Result Verification

The Slow Mist security team disclosed that the cross-chain bridge project Allbridge was attacked on August 19, 2026, resulting in a loss of approximately $190,000. Notably, this attack was not executed instantly; the attacker had begun laying the groundwork nearly a month prior and bypassed the verification mechanism by forging cross-chain messages. According to Slow Mist's analysis, on July 26, the attacker directly called Circle's MessageTransmitterV2.sendMessage function on the Polygon chain, constructing a cross-chain message disguised as a CCTP style message, claiming that a transfer of 1 million USDC existed, but in reality, no USDC destruction operation took place. Subsequently, Circle generated a valid verification proof (attestation) for this complete message according to normal procedures.About 24 days later, on August 19, the attacker waited for the Base Router to receive a real CCTP deposit, increasing the balance to approximately 191,000 USDC, and initiated the attack just 6 seconds later. The attacker utilized the previously forged message and verification proof to call Allbridge's receiveCctpMessage function. Due to the project's lack of critical verification, the system mistakenly recognized the false cross-chain message as a real deposit and recorded a limit of 1 million USDC. The attacker then temporarily borrowed approximately 809,000 USDC through an Aave flash loan, matching the Router balance with the forged amount, and used the internal credit record to call the transfer function, ultimately transferring out approximately 999,000 USDC (after a 0.1% fee). After repaying the flash loan and fees, the attacker netted a profit of about $189,800. The root cause of this vulnerability lies in Allbridge's failure to verify the identities of the sender and receiver of the cross-chain message, as well as not confirming whether USDC was genuinely minted and whether the balance actually increased, instead directly trusting the amounts and message hash data constructed by the attacker. Slow Mist emphasizes that on-chain message verification does not equate to the actual arrival of real assets. Cross-chain protocols not only need to verify the authenticity of messages but must also ensure that the message source is trustworthy, that the receiver is Circle's official TokenMessengerV2, and that asset accounting can only proceed after confirming the actual minting of assets and changes in balance. This incident once again highlights the security risks of cross-chain bridges in the message verification and asset settlement processes.

Large U.S. banking organizations propose to include customer identification requirements for the secondary market of stablecoins

The Bank Policy Institute (BPI) is an organization representing large banks such as JPMorgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Citi. BPI proposed that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of the U.S. Department of the Treasury should expand customer identification program requirements to the secondary market for stablecoins, covering exchanges and other platforms that establish direct account relationships with retail investors.BPI stated that the relevant exchanges and platforms engage in a significant amount of buying and selling activities within the payment stablecoin ecosystem, where most illegal activities related to stablecoins occur. If the proposal is incorporated into the rules, the relevant platforms will be required to collect customer information in accordance with the Bank Secrecy Act, and decentralized exchanges may also fall under regulatory oversight. The proposed rules by FinCEN indicate that transactions in the secondary market for stablecoins on the blockchain typically use anonymous or pseudonymous identities, and there are no centralized nodes for collecting identity information, limiting the ability of issuers to gather customer data from the secondary market. BPI has also opposed the current version of the Digital Asset Market Structure Bill along with other banking organizations.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.