Bybit’s Bounty Initiative and the Crypto Community’s Debate on Ethereum Rollback
Bybit has taken a bold step in response to a recent cyberattack orchestrated by the notorious Lazarus Group, offering an enticing bounty of up to 10% of the stolen funds to white hat hackers who successfully recover the lost cryptocurrency. This comes after the centralized exchange suffered a staggering loss of over $1.4 billion through the exploit.
To facilitate these recovery efforts, Bybit introduced a blacklisted wallet application programming interface (API) on February 23. This new tool aims to assist ethical hackers in tracking and retrieving diverted funds by periodically updating its blacklist to adapt to emerging threats. Bybit’s CEO, Ben Zhou, expressed optimism regarding the initiative, emphasizing the strength of the crypto community in confronting cyber threats. “I am energized by the incredible camaraderie onchain and in real life. This can be a transformative moment for our industry if we get it right. Together, we can build a stronger defense system against cyber threats,” he remarked.
The bounty program is not Bybit’s only strategy in its quest for justice and fund recovery. Zhou disclosed that discussions with law enforcement agencies in Singapore are already in progress. Additionally, the platform is exploring potential collaborations with organizations such as the Ethereum Foundation, seeking viable solutions that go beyond traditional law enforcement measures.
The Crypto Community’s Growing Debate Over Ethereum Rollbacks
As news of the breach spread, a heated discussion emerged within the cryptocurrency community regarding the possibility of an Ethereum blockchain rollback—a drastic measure that would essentially rewind the network to a state before the massive exploit on February 21. Social media platforms quickly became a battleground for passionate debates on whether such an action was ethical, feasible, or even justifiable in this scenario.
The discussion gained traction during a February 22 X Spaces event, where Ben Zhou was directly questioned about the possibility of reverting Ethereum to nullify the stolen funds. In response, Zhou stated that while he was uncertain whether a rollback would be the appropriate course of action, he firmly believed that such a decision should not rest in the hands of an individual or single entity. Instead, it should be determined through a collective community vote.
However, the idea of an Ethereum rollback faced strong opposition from core Ethereum developers, particularly Tim Beiko. Beiko dismissed the feasibility of the rollback, arguing that the breach itself did not stem from a fundamental violation of Ethereum’s protocol rules. “A compromised interface made it appear as though a transaction was doing one thing while it was actually doing another,” he explained, affirming that the attack did not exploit a flaw in Ethereum’s core mechanics, but rather a deceptive interface vulnerability.
He further elaborated that rolling back the blockchain would have far-reaching consequences for the entire ecosystem, potentially destabilizing the network’s integrity and functioning. Drawing a distinction between this scenario and the infamous 2016 DAO hack, Beiko pointed out that the circumstances behind the earlier rollback were vastly different, making a similar approach impractical in this case.
As the crypto community weighs its options, it remains evident that the aftermath of this attack will be a defining moment for the industry. While Bybit’s proactive steps, including its bounty program and legal consultations, illustrate a committed effort to recover the stolen assets, the broader discussion about Ethereum’s immutability and governance continues to spark debate across the blockchain space.
