On November 3, the Balancer V2 protocol and its fork projects were attacked on multiple chains, resulting in a serious loss of more than $120 million. BlockSec issued an early warning at the first opportunity [1] and gave a preliminary analysis conclusion [2]. This was a highly complex attack. Our preliminary analysis showed that the root cause was that the attacker manipulated the invariant, thereby distorting the calculation of the price of BPT (Balancer Pool Token) -- that is, the LP token of Balancer Pool -- so that it could profit in a stable pool through a batchSwap operation. Background Information 1. Scaling and Rounding To standardize the decimal places of different tokens, the Balancer contract will: upscale: Upscales the balance and amount to a uniform internal precision before performing the calculation; downscale: Reduces the result to its original precision and performs directional rounding (e.g., inputs are usually rounded up to ensure the pool is not under-filled; output paths are often truncated downwards). Conclusion: Within the same transaction, the asymmetrical rounding direction used in different stages can lead to a systematic slight deviation when executed repeatedly in very small steps. 2. Prices of D and BPT The Balancer V2 protocol’s Composable Stable Pool[3] and the fork protocol were affected by this attack. Stable Pool is used for assets that are expected to maintain a close 1:1 exchange ratio (or be exchanged at a known exchange rate), allowing large exchanges without causing significant price shocks, thereby greatly improving the efficiency of capital utilization between similar or related assets. The pool uses the Stable Math (a Curve-based StableSwap model), where the invariant D represents the pool's "virtual total value". The approximate price of BPT (Pool's LP Token) is: The formula above shows that if D is made smaller on paper (even if no funds are actually withdrawn), the price of BPT will be cheaper. BTP represents the pool share and is used to calculate how many pool reserves can be obtained when withdrawing liquidity. Therefore, if an attacker can obtain more BPT, they can profit when withdrawing liquidity. Attack Analysis Taking an attack transaction on Arbitrum as an example, the batchSwap operation can be divided into three stages: Phase 1: The attacker redeems BPT for the underlying asset to precisely adjust the balance of one of the tokens (cbETH) to a critical point (amount = 9) for rounding. This step sets the stage for the precision loss in the next phase. Phase Two: The attacker uses a carefully crafted quantity (= 8) to swap between another underlying asset (wstETH) and cbETH. Due to rounding down when scaling the token quantity, the calculated Δx is slightly smaller (from 8.918 to 8), causing Δy to be underestimated and the invariant D (derived from Curve's StableSwap model) to be smaller. Since BPT price = D / totalSupply, the BPT price is artificially suppressed. Phase 3: The attackers reverse-swap the underlying assets back to BPT, restoring the balance within the pool while profiting from the depressed price of BPT—acquiring more BPT tokens. Finally, the attacker used another profitable transaction to withdraw liquidity, thereby using the extra BPT to acquire other underlying assets (cbETH and wstETH) in the Pool and thus profit. Attacking the transaction: https://app.blocksec.com/explorer/tx/arbitrum/0x7da32ebc615d0f29a24cacf9d18254bea3a2c730084c690ee40238b1d8b55773 Profitable trades: https://app.blocksec.com/explorer/tx/arbitrum/0x4e5be713d986bcf4afb2ba7362525622acf9c95310bd77cd5911e7ef12d871a9 Reference: [1]https://x.com/Phalcon_xyz/status/1985262010347696312 [2]https://x.com/Phalcon_xyz/status/1985302779263643915 [3]https://docs-v2.balancer.fi/concepts/pools/composable-stable.htmlOn November 3, the Balancer V2 protocol and its fork projects were attacked on multiple chains, resulting in a serious loss of more than $120 million. BlockSec issued an early warning at the first opportunity [1] and gave a preliminary analysis conclusion [2]. This was a highly complex attack. Our preliminary analysis showed that the root cause was that the attacker manipulated the invariant, thereby distorting the calculation of the price of BPT (Balancer Pool Token) -- that is, the LP token of Balancer Pool -- so that it could profit in a stable pool through a batchSwap operation. Background Information 1. Scaling and Rounding To standardize the decimal places of different tokens, the Balancer contract will: upscale: Upscales the balance and amount to a uniform internal precision before performing the calculation; downscale: Reduces the result to its original precision and performs directional rounding (e.g., inputs are usually rounded up to ensure the pool is not under-filled; output paths are often truncated downwards). Conclusion: Within the same transaction, the asymmetrical rounding direction used in different stages can lead to a systematic slight deviation when executed repeatedly in very small steps. 2. Prices of D and BPT The Balancer V2 protocol’s Composable Stable Pool[3] and the fork protocol were affected by this attack. Stable Pool is used for assets that are expected to maintain a close 1:1 exchange ratio (or be exchanged at a known exchange rate), allowing large exchanges without causing significant price shocks, thereby greatly improving the efficiency of capital utilization between similar or related assets. The pool uses the Stable Math (a Curve-based StableSwap model), where the invariant D represents the pool's "virtual total value". The approximate price of BPT (Pool's LP Token) is: The formula above shows that if D is made smaller on paper (even if no funds are actually withdrawn), the price of BPT will be cheaper. BTP represents the pool share and is used to calculate how many pool reserves can be obtained when withdrawing liquidity. Therefore, if an attacker can obtain more BPT, they can profit when withdrawing liquidity. Attack Analysis Taking an attack transaction on Arbitrum as an example, the batchSwap operation can be divided into three stages: Phase 1: The attacker redeems BPT for the underlying asset to precisely adjust the balance of one of the tokens (cbETH) to a critical point (amount = 9) for rounding. This step sets the stage for the precision loss in the next phase. Phase Two: The attacker uses a carefully crafted quantity (= 8) to swap between another underlying asset (wstETH) and cbETH. Due to rounding down when scaling the token quantity, the calculated Δx is slightly smaller (from 8.918 to 8), causing Δy to be underestimated and the invariant D (derived from Curve's StableSwap model) to be smaller. Since BPT price = D / totalSupply, the BPT price is artificially suppressed. Phase 3: The attackers reverse-swap the underlying assets back to BPT, restoring the balance within the pool while profiting from the depressed price of BPT—acquiring more BPT tokens. Finally, the attacker used another profitable transaction to withdraw liquidity, thereby using the extra BPT to acquire other underlying assets (cbETH and wstETH) in the Pool and thus profit. Attacking the transaction: https://app.blocksec.com/explorer/tx/arbitrum/0x7da32ebc615d0f29a24cacf9d18254bea3a2c730084c690ee40238b1d8b55773 Profitable trades: https://app.blocksec.com/explorer/tx/arbitrum/0x4e5be713d986bcf4afb2ba7362525622acf9c95310bd77cd5911e7ef12d871a9 Reference: [1]https://x.com/Phalcon_xyz/status/1985262010347696312 [2]https://x.com/Phalcon_xyz/status/1985302779263643915 [3]https://docs-v2.balancer.fi/concepts/pools/composable-stable.html

Preliminary analysis of the Balancer V2 attack, which resulted in a loss of $120 million.

2025/11/04 14:00
3 min di lettura
Per feedback o dubbi su questo contenuto, contattateci all'indirizzo crypto.news@mexc.com.

On November 3, the Balancer V2 protocol and its fork projects were attacked on multiple chains, resulting in a serious loss of more than $120 million. BlockSec issued an early warning at the first opportunity [1] and gave a preliminary analysis conclusion [2]. This was a highly complex attack. Our preliminary analysis showed that the root cause was that the attacker manipulated the invariant, thereby distorting the calculation of the price of BPT (Balancer Pool Token) -- that is, the LP token of Balancer Pool -- so that it could profit in a stable pool through a batchSwap operation.

Background Information

1. Scaling and Rounding

To standardize the decimal places of different tokens, the Balancer contract will:

  • upscale: Upscales the balance and amount to a uniform internal precision before performing the calculation;
  • downscale: Reduces the result to its original precision and performs directional rounding (e.g., inputs are usually rounded up to ensure the pool is not under-filled; output paths are often truncated downwards).

Conclusion: Within the same transaction, the asymmetrical rounding direction used in different stages can lead to a systematic slight deviation when executed repeatedly in very small steps.

2. Prices of D and BPT

The Balancer V2 protocol’s Composable Stable Pool[3] and the fork protocol were affected by this attack. Stable Pool is used for assets that are expected to maintain a close 1:1 exchange ratio (or be exchanged at a known exchange rate), allowing large exchanges without causing significant price shocks, thereby greatly improving the efficiency of capital utilization between similar or related assets.

  • The pool uses the Stable Math (a Curve-based StableSwap model), where the invariant D represents the pool's "virtual total value".
  • The approximate price of BPT (Pool's LP Token) is:

The formula above shows that if D is made smaller on paper (even if no funds are actually withdrawn), the price of BPT will be cheaper. BTP represents the pool share and is used to calculate how many pool reserves can be obtained when withdrawing liquidity. Therefore, if an attacker can obtain more BPT, they can profit when withdrawing liquidity.

Attack Analysis

Taking an attack transaction on Arbitrum as an example, the batchSwap operation can be divided into three stages:

Phase 1: The attacker redeems BPT for the underlying asset to precisely adjust the balance of one of the tokens (cbETH) to a critical point (amount = 9) for rounding. This step sets the stage for the precision loss in the next phase.

Phase Two: The attacker uses a carefully crafted quantity (= 8) to swap between another underlying asset (wstETH) and cbETH. Due to rounding down when scaling the token quantity, the calculated Δx is slightly smaller (from 8.918 to 8), causing Δy to be underestimated and the invariant D (derived from Curve's StableSwap model) to be smaller. Since BPT price = D / totalSupply, the BPT price is artificially suppressed.

Phase 3: The attackers reverse-swap the underlying assets back to BPT, restoring the balance within the pool while profiting from the depressed price of BPT—acquiring more BPT tokens.

Finally, the attacker used another profitable transaction to withdraw liquidity, thereby using the extra BPT to acquire other underlying assets (cbETH and wstETH) in the Pool and thus profit.

Attacking the transaction:

Profitable trades:

Reference:

[1]https://x.com/Phalcon_xyz/status/1985262010347696312

[2]https://x.com/Phalcon_xyz/status/1985302779263643915

[3]https://docs-v2.balancer.fi/concepts/pools/composable-stable.html

Opportunità di mercato
Logo Moonveil
Valore Moonveil (MORE)
$0.0001653
$0.0001653$0.0001653
+1.97%
USD
Grafico dei prezzi in tempo reale di Moonveil (MORE)
Disclaimer: gli articoli ripubblicati su questo sito provengono da piattaforme pubbliche e sono forniti esclusivamente a scopo informativo. Non riflettono necessariamente le opinioni di MEXC. Tutti i diritti rimangono agli autori originali. Se ritieni che un contenuto violi i diritti di terze parti, contatta crypto.news@mexc.com per la rimozione. MEXC non fornisce alcuna garanzia in merito all'accuratezza, completezza o tempestività del contenuto e non è responsabile per eventuali azioni intraprese sulla base delle informazioni fornite. Il contenuto non costituisce consulenza finanziaria, legale o professionale di altro tipo, né deve essere considerato una raccomandazione o un'approvazione da parte di MEXC.

Potrebbe anche piacerti

Tactical haven support but structural headwinds – BBH

Tactical haven support but structural headwinds – BBH

The post Tactical haven support but structural headwinds – BBH appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Brown Brothers Harriman’s (BBH) Elias Haddad notes the Dollar
Condividi
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/03/16 15:44
CME Group to launch options on XRP and SOL futures

CME Group to launch options on XRP and SOL futures

The post CME Group to launch options on XRP and SOL futures appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. CME Group will offer options based on the derivative markets on Solana (SOL) and XRP. The new markets will open on October 13, after regulatory approval.  CME Group will expand its crypto products with options on the futures markets of Solana (SOL) and XRP. The futures market will start on October 13, after regulatory review and approval.  The options will allow the trading of MicroSol, XRP, and MicroXRP futures, with expiry dates available every business day, monthly, and quarterly. The new products will be added to the existing BTC and ETH options markets. ‘The launch of these options contracts builds on the significant growth and increasing liquidity we have seen across our suite of Solana and XRP futures,’ said Giovanni Vicioso, CME Group Global Head of Cryptocurrency Products. The options contracts will have two main sizes, tracking the futures contracts. The new market will be suitable for sophisticated institutional traders, as well as active individual traders. The addition of options markets singles out XRP and SOL as liquid enough to offer the potential to bet on a market direction.  The options on futures arrive a few months after the launch of SOL futures. Both SOL and XRP had peak volumes in August, though XRP activity has slowed down in September. XRP and SOL options to tap both institutions and active traders Crypto options are one of the indicators of market attitudes, with XRP and SOL receiving a new way to gauge sentiment. The contracts will be supported by the Cumberland team.  ‘As one of the biggest liquidity providers in the ecosystem, the Cumberland team is excited to support CME Group’s continued expansion of crypto offerings,’ said Roman Makarov, Head of Cumberland Options Trading at DRW. ‘The launch of options on Solana and XRP futures is the latest example of the…
Condividi
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:56
Secure and Trusted Online Casinos in USA: Choose Wisely

Secure and Trusted Online Casinos in USA: Choose Wisely

Cryptsy - Latest Cryptocurrency News and Predictions Cryptsy - Latest Cryptocurrency News and Predictions - Experts in Crypto Casinos Looking for a trusted online
Condividi
Cryptsy2026/03/16 13:12