BTC Ecology: Atomics protocol vulnerability, Atomics Market shut down, ARC-20 stalled?
Original - Odaily
Editor - Loopy Lu
Today, an eye-catching risk incident occurred in the encryption world, involving the recent ongoing fire.ARC-20 Token, Atomics Protocol and its trading platform Atomics Market are even more deeply questioned.
Atomics Market issued a statement stating that it recently discovered a PBST flaw in the Atomics protocol, which resulted in users losing atom tokens and not receiving corresponding payments; all markets were therefore closed until the protocol team solved the problem.
Atomics Market has decided to replace all lost atom tokens for affected users. The team is verifying wallet and transaction IDs. Relevant users are requested to contact the official in time (for example, through the Tech Support channel in Discord). Atomic Market will resume operations after ensuring user safety.
As soon as this incident came out, the community was in an uproar. ARC-20 has been in the limelight in the recent inscription market. However, the loss of user assets and the temporary closure of the market have triggered doubts about ARC-20. People cant help but question whether the Atomics protocol is too premature? Is such an imperfect infrastructure sufficient to support the expansion and progress of this track?
How are assets lost?
How atoms were lost has become the first issue of concern to the community.
Specifically, Atomics Market experienced a significant signing error during its operations. This error caused the user to lose a large amount of atom tokens, and the payment of these tokens also failed to be completed smoothly. Atomics Market believes that this problem stems from the unreasonable design of the Atomics Protocol and contains security flaws.
Atomics Protocol insists that they have previously warned about the risks of using SIGHASH_NONE signatures, as this signature method may lead to the theft of funds. They emphasized that the ARC 20 PBST exchange was not inherently defective.
Atomics Protocol clearly stated that the cause of the incident did not lie in the protocol itself. Both sides hold their own opinions.
It should be noted that Atomics Protocol and Atomics Market are two similar names.In fact, they are two products.
Atomics Protocol provides a protocol based on Bitcoins UTXO model to support the ARC-20 token standard, which allows for more complex operations on the Bitcoin network. The Atomics Market is a third-party market that supports ARC-20 token transactions. It uses the technology and services provided by the Atomics Protocol to conduct transactions.
After this risk occurred, the mutual accusations between the two also aroused the attention of Chigua users.
Atomics Protocol responded: Atomics Market is lying when it accuses Atomics Protocol of being negligent in signing with SIGHASH_NONE and putting its users at risk. The ARC 20 PBST exchange is not defective.
They bluntly stated, “We actuallyAtomics Market has been warned not to use SIGHASH_NONE initially, as it can lead to the theft of funds. We can prove it. The fact remains that they knew they were violating basic security practices by rushing their product to market.
Atomics Protocol also said, “We know that losing funds is devastating and causes a loss of trust for everyone involved. Any Bitcoin-related service must put user safety first and cannot compromise user safety and trust. Even if ARC 20 PBST There are issues with the exchange and signing with SIGHASH_NONE is unacceptable as this will obviously result in the theft of user funds. For the record, we are in no way affiliated with Atomics Market or any other wallet, marketplace or any other project.”
Atomics Protocol: It’s not my fault
There is no doubt that the security of the protocol has become the core of this controversy.
PBST is a special form of Bitcoin transaction. It was mentioned in the dispute between Atomics Protocol and Atomics Market. Specifically, PBST creates conditional transactions by using different types of Bitcoin transaction signatures, such as SIGHASH_NONE. The core of this transaction type is that it allows users to specify certain conditions for the transaction.
What is more worthy of users’ attention is that Atomics Protocol states that they have no connection with Atomics Market, any other wallets, or other markets.
Regardless of who is at fault, the confidence of the ARC-20 community has been shattered.
The temporary closure of the market directly affects users who trade ARC-20 tokens, and the safety of investors funds faces severe challenges. The communitys reaction to the incident was mixed. On the one hand, many users are angry about the operational errors of Atomics Market; on the other hand, some voices are beginning to question the safety and reliability of Atomics Protocol.
Atomics Market: Founder Out
The communitys confidence was tested following the incident. Many users and investors are beginning to reassess their trust in this niche market.
Regardless of who is at fault, the incident occurred at Atomics Market. And someone on this side must take responsibility for this incident.
In response to the crisis, the founders of Atomics Market announced they were stepping down from management.
This afternoon, shep.eth, an early community member of Atomicals, published a letter to the Atomicals community on the X platform. In his letter, he disclosed the team’s stance on the matter: “Recently, serious security incidents have occurred in the two trading markets of Atomics, resulting in hacker attacks and loss of user assets. In the past few days, I have been affected by We entrusted people to communicate with the Atomics Market (hereinafter referred to as AM) team, hoping to clarify the cause of the accident and try to get the AM team to compensate the users who suffered this loss, and the following progress has been made:
AM founder Erik (@BRC 20 Coins) willNo longer holds any management position;The new CEO will be my friend X, who will remain anonymous for now. The CEO handover is in progress, and AM will provide further explanations upon completion;
All 33,000 atoms that were lost in the previous two 0 yuan purchase incidents will be fully compensated by the new team within one week after the handover is completed;
AM will adjust the overall operations and development team, enhance the testing process, ensure asset security, improve user experience and communication fluency;
After AM fixes the vulnerability, it will reopen for trading and establish a safety fund guarantee mechanism to deal with possible subsequent unexpected events;
AM will reconsider and adjust the brand, including logo, name and other images. Please wait for further official updates for specific details;
I will not personally participate in the management and decision-making of AM, but will provide suggestions and communication channels as a member of the Atomics community and a friend of X.
Once the new team completes the handover, damaged users will be compensated. The decision went some way to alleviating unease among community members.
end
At present, this incident has come to an end. Although the users losses have not yet been compensated, the release of the solution can at least bring this incident to an end.
But what this incident has brought to the inscription market is probably not just an impact on the ARC-20 market.
In the past week, the inscription ecology of multiple chains such as Solana and Polygon has continued to take off, and the popularity of the inscription track continues to rise. For the inscription market, this track is still in a relatively early stage. Especially in the Bitcoin inscription market, the imperfections and lack of infrastructure make the market still relatively immature. Security and risks are still worthy of user concern.
For the inscription market, it is crucial to ensure the correctness of technical implementation and compliance with operational specifications. The loss of ARC-20 tokens highlights the weaknesses in the security of the crypto market.
For the market operators of Inscription Tokens, these teams may be too immature and they lack corresponding response plans. Market parties should prepare strategies to deal with security breaches, capital losses, or other emergencies.
While pursuing technological innovation, the inscription market should also consider the importance of safety. Technological innovation should not come at the expense of security. Participants in the inscription market should commit to collaboration within the industry to jointly develop and adhere to safety and operational standards to improve the safety and reliability of the entire ecosystem.
Odaily reminds investors that there are a lot of unknown risks in the early market, and investors are advised to take precautions against risks.
