This article sorts out the beginning and end of ParaSpace's "infighting" drama

This afternoon, a number of KOLs issued warnings of conflicts within the ParaSpace team of the NFT lending agreement, and advised users to withdraw their funds as soon as possible.

In order to understand the cause of the incident and quell the panic in the community, Odaily specially invited Yubo, the founder of ParaSpace, to conduct a Twitter Space live connection. In the live broadcast, Yubo admitted that there were some differences with the previous marketing team because the specific cooperation method had not been finalized, but there was absolutely no misappropriation of user assets. The FUD surrounding ParaSpace this time is driven by a market team that has disagreements with it, intending to use false information to guide public opinion to force itself to "abdicate".

Shortly after the Twitter Space, Jay, the chief business officer representing the ParaSpace marketing team, also appeared on the microphone, accusing Yubo of misappropriating user assets and losing contact for 30 hours, and claimed that the ParaSpace team had jointly kicked Yubo out of the list of multi-signature personnel .

The two sides insist on their own opinions. In order to clarify the ins and outs of the whole matter, Odaily simply sorted out the differences and opinions of the two parties. For details, you can listen to this episodesecondary title。

Core Controversy 1: The Mystery of Misappropriating User Funds

In the live broadcast, Jay directly accused Yubo of allegedly misappropriating user funds, and posted a PDF document, the content of which was an on-chain flow of an EOA address (0x909e36b512ed45250fdff513523119d825647695) controlled by Yubo.

At the same time, Jay also released a long tweet jointly signed by more than a dozen employees through ParaSpace's official Twitter (Yubo said that the account has been controlled by Jay), which mentioned several doubts about the largest flow of the address:

• First, the user funds returned to the address by BlockSec have not been fully returned to the agreement, resulting in a funding gap in the agreement Treasury;

• The second is that the address is an EOA wallet with domain names ruanyubo.eth and paraspaceinsurance.eth (actually redirected to yubo.eth). In addition, there is a transaction record unrelated to ParaSpace Insurance (insurance, the business mentioned in the second domain name) at this address, and it flows out to yubo.eth.

• The third is that since the hacking incident, more than $1,000,000 of funds in this address have flowed to various addresses (including CEX addresses), and some of them can be traced to the Circle redemption operation.

Odaily Note: Preliminary summary: In March of this year, ParaSpace was attacked by hackers, but because the security company BlockSec stopped it in time, it rescued 2900 ETH of funds, and then BlockSec returned the funds to ParaSpace by transferring these funds to addresses starting with 0x909.

In response to Jay's allegations, Yubo's response is as follows:

• The address starting with 0x909 is actually ParaSpace’s daily operation wallet. For efficiency reasons, this address is currently an EOA address controlled by him, but there are plans to upgrade this address to multi-signature.

• The reason why there is no fund return agreement to fully return BlockSec is because the debt gap in the agreement is based on the US dollar, while BlockSec returns ETH, so I chose to gradually sell and make up the agreement at a frequency of one or two weeks in combination with market changes. The debt gap, which was as high as about US$5.7 million at the peak, is now only about US$700,000, and the repayment plan has been communicated with the team before.

• As for the multiple small transfers, they are actually normal expenses such as salary transactions and GAS returns for ParaSpace employees, and these can provide relevant records.

secondary title。

Core Controversy 2: The mystery of the seizure of power and control, who has the final say on the agreement now?

In addition to the disagreement on the flow of funds, Jay also said in live broadcasts and tweets that in order to protect the security of ParaSpace, the multi-signature member group has kicked Yubo out of the signatories of the multi-signature address of the agreement.

In this regard, Yubo retorted that the multi-signature address of the ParaSpace agreement currently has 5 signers, one of whom is Jay's "confidant" Thomas Schmidt (the position is the chief operating officer, and he also signed the long tweet mentioned above), and the remaining 4 Three of them are technicians, and one is a researcher in the base United States. These four people have signed formal labor agreements with ParaSpace as regular employees. At present, lawyers have communicated with these employees, and they are also aware of the influence of Jay et al. Deceived by people, I am willing to cooperate with Yubo's follow-up work. In short, Yubo says the protocol is actually still under its control.

secondary title

Are user funds safe?

Based on the speeches of Yubo and Jay, the main contradictions of funds in this incident are concentrated on the flow of addresses starting with 0x909, and user funds other than the repayment part of BlockSec will not be affected.With the filling of the last 700,000 debt gap, this means that theoretically the funds belonging to the user have been fully replenished.

Considering that the contract of ParaSpace has been audited by many institutions (although it is still stolen by hackers), and Yubo and Jay are fighting endlessly for the control of the project, but both expect to continue to lead the subsequent development and operation of the project, theoretically speaking User funds are safe.

As for which direction the incident will develop in the future, Odaily will continue to follow up and report, please stay tuned.