Solana Drift 协议被盗 2.85 亿美元,涉及伪造代币和治理权劫持。
Solana Drift Protocol drained of $285M via fake token and governance hijack

原始链接: https://anonhaven.com/en/news/drift-protocol-hack-285-million-solana/

## Drift 协议黑客攻击:损失 2.85 亿美元 2026年4月1日,Solana 上最大的永续期货交易所 Drift Protocol 遭受了 2.85 亿美元的攻击——今年最大的 DeFi 黑客事件,也是 Solana 历史上第二大黑客事件。此次攻击并非针对智能合约代码,而是通过复杂的社会工程学利用了治理漏洞。 攻击者,据怀疑与朝鲜黑客组织有关,基于链上模式,制造了一种虚构资产 (CVT),并利用少量资金人为抬高其价格。随后,他们诱使 Drift 的安全委员会预先签署交易,授予管理权限,这得益于最近迁移到零时间锁多重签名设置。 这使得攻击者能够将 CVT 列为抵押品,提高提款限额,并从近 20 个金库中提取资金,将盗取的资产兑换成 ETH 和 SOL。尽管受到批评,Circle 的 CCTP 桥并未在资金转移期间冻结资金。 此次黑客事件凸显了 DeFi 中的一个关键漏洞:人为因素。传统的代码审计未能识别这些治理缺陷,强调了需要更广泛的安全评估,涵盖社会工程学风险和操作程序。该事件导致 Drift 的 TVL 暴跌,并影响了许多相互连接的 DeFi 协议。

## Solana Drift 协议黑客事件 - 摘要 基于 Solana 的 Drift 协议因一起复杂的攻击而损失了 2.85 亿美元,该攻击涉及社会工程学和伪造代币。黑客通过欺骗 Drift 的安全委员会预先签署看似正常的交易,但这些交易包含隐藏的授权,允许部署虚假的“CarbonVote Token”(CVT)并劫持治理权。 评论员指出安全委员会未能彻底审查已签署的交易,质疑团队的基本安全措施。该事件引发了对加密协议整体可信度的担忧,即使是勤奋的用户,漏洞也可能源于项目领导层或复杂的系统交互。 尽管损失巨大,但一些观察家注意到了一些积极方面——相关协议(如 Jupiter)的功能以及保险机制——展示了 Web3 生态系统内的潜在优势。另一些人则对 Drift 的复苏表示怀疑,考虑到当前加密热潮的下滑,并批评缺乏对责任人的问责。
相关文章

原文

Attackers drained $285 million from Drift Protocol, Solana's largest perpetual futures exchange, on April 1, 2026. TRM Labs estimates the drain took roughly 12 minutes. The exploit targeted governance, not smart contract code.

TRM Labs assessed the hack was "likely perpetrated by North Korean hackers" based on on-chain staging patterns. Elliptic independently assessed the behaviour as consistent with previous DPRK-backed operations.

A malicious actor gained unauthorized access to Drift Protocol through a novel attack involving durable nonces, resulting in a rapid takeover of Drift's Security Council administrative powers.

— Drift Protocol, via X

The preparation began on March 11 with a 10 ETH withdrawal from Tornado Cash. The funds were used to deploy CarbonVote Token (CVT), a completely fictitious asset with approximately 750 million units minted. The attacker seeded a small liquidity pool on Raydium with a few thousand dollars. Wash trading built an artificial price history near $1.

Drift's oracles picked up the manufactured price. CVT began to look like legitimate collateral.

Between March 23 and March 30, the attacker created multiple "durable nonce" accounts. Durable nonces are a legitimate Solana feature that allows transactions to be pre-signed and executed later without expiring. The attacker used social engineering to induce Drift Security Council multisig signers into pre-signing transactions that appeared routine but carried hidden authorisations.

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.

April 1 was execution day. The attacker listed CVT as a valid market on Drift, raised withdrawal limits to extreme levels, and drained funds from nearly 20 vaults.

This is not an April Fools joke.

— Drift Protocol, via X

Stolen assets were converted to USDC and SOL. The attacker bridged them from Solana to Ethereum using Circle's Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP), converted to ETH, and accumulated approximately 129,066 ETH. SOL deposits went into HyperLiquid and Binance.

ZachXBT publicly criticised Circle for not freezing the stolen USDC during the bridge. The funds moved during US business hours over several hours without intervention.

The exploit wiped out more than half of Drift's total value locked. TVL fell from roughly $550 million to $252 million. The DRIFT token dropped approximately 40%.

Nearly 20 interconnected DeFi protocols reported knock-on effects. PiggyBank_fi reported approximately $106,000 in exposure and covered users from team funds. Ranger Finance paused deposits with estimated exposure over $900,000. Jupiter Exchange confirmed its JLP pool remains fully backed.

Drift sent on-chain messages on April 3 to four wallets holding the stolen ETH. The protocol urged the holders to open a dialogue.

At $285 million, this is the largest DeFi hack of 2026. It is the second-largest exploit in Solana's history, behind only the $326 million Wormhole bridge hack in 2022. TRM Labs noted the post-hack laundering exceeded the pace of the Bybit exploit in 2025 in both speed and transaction size. North Korean crypto operations have followed similar playbooks since at least the 2022 Ronin Bridge hack.

On-chain staging began March 11 with the Tornado Cash withdrawal. The funds began moving the following day at approximately 12:00 AM GMT, around 9:00 AM Pyongyang time. Ledger CTO Charles Guillemet drew parallels to the $1.4 billion Bybit hack, also attributed to North Korean actors. He assessed that attackers likely compromised multisig signer machines through long-term infiltration.

Smart contracts held up. The real targets now are humans: social engineering and opsec weaknesses more than code exploits.

— Lily Liu, President, Solana Foundation

North Korea stole approximately $2 billion in cryptocurrency in 2025, according to Chainalysis. That was roughly 60% of all digital assets stolen that year. The Bybit hack used the same pattern. Patient, multi-week preparation targeting governance and signers, not code.

Trail of Bits audited Drift in 2022. ClawSecure audited it in February 2026. Neither review identified the governance weaknesses that made the attack possible. The CVT market introduction and the zero-timelock Security Council migration fell outside the scope of code-focused audits.

A few thousand dollars in fake liquidity turned into $285 million in stolen assets. The attacker did not find a bug. They built a token, manufactured a price, tricked signers into pre-approving transactions, removed the timelock, and executed. Every step targeted humans and governance, not code. DeFi audits that review only smart contracts leave the most exploitable surface unchecked.

— Artem Safonov, Threat Analyst at AnonHaven

Cindy Leow and David Lu founded Drift Protocol in 2021. The exchange held over $400 million in total deposits before the attack. Drift committed to releasing more information once forensic reviews are complete.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com