Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and governance hijack

Re:Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and... by lokar on Friday April 03, 2026 @02:30PM (#47630247)

That was inevitable, and all designs like that will eventually yield the same outcome.

The people who should be embarrassed are the ones who thought having a group of humans routinely review (possibly complex) transactions for correctness, with no ability to undo/revert the outcome, was a good idea.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and... by lokar on Friday April 03, 2026 @02:34PM (#47630290)

Also, how could one reasonably disprove that the signers were not in on the scam?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and... by bombcar on Friday April 03, 2026 @02:46PM (#47630475)

That’s the best part, you can’t!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and... by sebgan on Friday April 03, 2026 @03:31PM (#47631086)

This is conveniently suspect, no? “Drift migrated its Security Council on March 27 to a new 2-of-5 threshold with zero timelock. That eliminated the delay that would have allowed detection before admin actions took effect.” This was after the perp started working on the heist earlier in the month.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and... by gus_massa on Friday April 03, 2026 @04:32PM (#47631878)

> 2-of-5

Just to be sure... They need less than half of the Security Council to approve it?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and... by bombcar on Friday April 03, 2026 @05:28PM (#47632535)

If it's a "time-safe" kind of thing, 2-of-5 is common. No one person can open it, but any two can.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and... by bit1993 on Friday April 03, 2026 @06:03PM (#47632923)

This exactly why I hate communism.

[ Parent | on HN ]