Dayum 😲😯😲😯😲😲😯 that is bad 😞 is Adam gonna replenish the sats lol

I think the problem here, and imho this is **really** nasty, is:

1. The problem was spotted a while ago and it was fixed, but not treated as a security incident.
2. The fix commit was sitting in a release candidate
3. The attacker raced the release / deployment of the fix

So that is a nightmare scenario for open collaboration on FOSS, which is something we have to think about how to counter. I might make a post about it, because this is pretty bad.

> Or is it able to be cancelled

No. The swap already paid on L1 in BTC.

> So whose buckets do these 4 hunny billy sats get taken from?

It's 95% of all sats on Liquid - basically the backing of that entire network.

optimism

Such a simple flaw to exploit, once the door has been unlocked 🔓

The zcash had an inflation bug that was unknown because of obvious reasons, but this is more visible on liquid, albeit it's more private than on chain

So whose buckets do these 4 hunny billy sats get taken from?

Or is it able to be cancelled as the federation is a centralised entity, can they unapprove this?

Stacker Saloon

saloon

Big Phil Scolari Oof!! 

Such a simple flaw to exploit, once the door has been unlocked 🔓 

The zcash had an inflation bug that was unknown because of obvious reasons, but this is more visible on liquid, albeit it's more private than on chain 

So whose buckets do these 4 hunny billy sats get taken from?

Or is it able to be cancelled as the federation is a centralised entity, can they unapprove this?