<p>Makina，一个去中心化金融协议，在 <strong>1 月 20 日</strong> 遭遇了攻击，导致 <strong>超过 400 万美元</strong> 的损失。</p>
<p>Makina 最近的攻击事件增加了 2026 年初记录的去中心化金融安全事件的数量，进一步加深了人们对熟悉的攻击方式在资本流入中持续扩大的担忧。</p>
<h2><strong>Makina 攻击事件：发生了什么</strong></h2>
<p>在 <strong>1 月 20 日</strong>，Makina 披露了一起影响其 <strong>DUSD/USDC Curve 池</strong> 的攻击事件，估计损失约为 <strong>420 万美元</strong>，根据事件摘要和安全报告。</p>
<p>团队表示，攻击仅限于 Curve 池的 USDC 部分，并未影响持有 DUSD、Pendle 或 Gearbox 头寸的用户，也未影响 Makina 的 Machines 中的资金。</p>
<p>Makina 和 Dialectic 在事件发生的早晨被警告。该协议的安全委员会启动了恢复模式，暂停了所有 Machines，并与 <strong>SEAL911</strong> 和外部审计师协调。</p>
<p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Screenshot-2026-01-21-at-16.51.44.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" alt="" width="1082" height="850" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Screenshot-2026-01-21-at-16.51.44.png"/></p>
<p>来源：X</p>
<p>Hypernative 警报在攻击发生前一个区块标记了可疑活动，最终由一个被识别为 <strong>MEV 机器人</strong> 的第二个地址执行了攻击。</p>
<p>Makina 表示已识别出根本原因，并采取措施防止进一步损失。此外，它正在进行恢复工作，包括与与攻击相关的地址进行接触。</p>
<p>已对受影响的池进行了快照，建议受影响的流动性提供者 [LPs] 在恢复期间单边提取至 DUSD。</p>
<p>一旦调查完成，预计将发布完整的事后分析。</p>
<h2><strong>2026 年 1 月：去中心化金融攻击的熟悉模式</strong></h2>
<p>Makina 的事件是今年迄今为止记录的几起显著协议级攻击之一。虽然基础攻击方法各不相同，但大多数损失源于 <strong>逻辑错误</strong>、<strong>配置风险</strong> 或 <strong>遗留合约假设</strong>，而非新型攻击技术。</p>
<p>1 月报告的最大事件包括：</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Truebit [1 月 8 日]</strong>：由于与遗留字节码和绑定曲线机制相关的缺陷，损失约为 <strong>2600 万美元</strong>，成为 2026 年迄今为止最大的攻击事件。</li>
<li><strong>YO Protocol [1 月 13-14 日]</strong>：约 <strong>370 万美元</strong> 因被描述为滑点相关的攻击或操作级配置错误而被抽走。</li>
<li><strong>TMXTribe [1 月初]</strong>：由于协议中的逻辑错误，损失约为 <strong>140 万美元</strong>。</li>
</ul>
<p>该领域还报告了一些较小的事件，尽管许多涉及的损失有限或用户侧钱包被攻破，而非核心协议失败。</p>
<h2><strong>损失集中在少数事件中</strong></h2>
<p>尽管自年初以来报告了超过七起安全事件，但总损失仍然高度集中在少数攻击中。</p>
<p>仅 Truebit 就占据了报告损失的显著份额，而 Makina 和 YO Protocol 则形成了第二层影响。</p>
<p>这种集中表明，尽管攻击频率仍然较高，但系统性风险仍然由少数高影响的失败驱动，而非广泛的协议失败。</p>
<hr/>
<h2><strong>最后的思考</strong></h2>
<ul>
<li>2026 年初的攻击显示，熟悉的去中心化金融失败模式仍在持续，损失是由规模驱动的，而非新攻击技术。</li>
<li>Makina 的事件强调了在协议复杂性增加时，MEV 意识设计和快速响应框架的重要性。</li>
</ul>
<hr/>

BITO

EETH

2 倍做多 Riot ETF - Defiance

<p>Makina，一个去中心化金融协议，在 2026 年 1 月 20 日遭遇了攻击，导致损失超过 400 万美元。此次攻击针对其 DUSD/USDC Curve 池的 USDC 部分，但未影响其他资产。这一事件是 2026 年初令人担忧的趋势的一部分，多个去中心化金融攻击被报告，包括 Truebit 的 2600 万美元损失。损失集中在少数事件中，突显了去中心化金融领域持续存在的系统性风险，强调了改善安全措施和快速响应策略的必要性</p>

<p>Makina, a DeFi protocol, suffered an exploit on <strong>20 January</strong>, resulting in the loss of <strong>over $4 million</strong>.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Makina，一个去中心化金融协议，在 <strong>1 月 20 日</strong> 遭遇了攻击，导致 <strong>超过 400 万美元</strong> 的损失。</p>
</div><p>Makina’s recent exploit has added to a growing list of DeFi security incidents recorded in the opening weeks of 2026, reinforcing concerns that familiar attack vectors continue to scale alongside capital inflows.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Makina 最近的攻击事件增加了 2026 年初记录的去中心化金融安全事件的数量，进一步加深了人们对熟悉的攻击方式在资本流入中持续扩大的担忧。</p>
</div><h2><strong>Makina exploit: what happened</strong></h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2><strong>Makina 攻击事件：发生了什么</strong></h2>
</div><p>On <strong>20 January</strong>, Makina disclosed an exploit affecting liquidity providers in its <strong>DUSD/USDC Curve pool</strong>, resulting in estimated losses of around <strong>$4.2 millio</strong> n, according to incident summaries and security reports.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在 <strong>1 月 20 日</strong>，Makina 披露了一起影响其 <strong>DUSD/USDC Curve 池</strong> 的攻击事件，估计损失约为 <strong>420 万美元</strong>，根据事件摘要和安全报告。</p>
</div><p>The team said the attack was isolated to the USDC side of the Curve pool and did not impact users holding DUSD, Pendle, or Gearbox positions, nor funds held within Makina’s Machines.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>团队表示，攻击仅限于 Curve 池的 USDC 部分，并未影响持有 DUSD、Pendle 或 Gearbox 头寸的用户，也未影响 Makina 的 Machines 中的资金。</p>
</div><p>Makina and Dialectic were alerted in the early hours of the incident. The protocol’s Security Council activated recovery mode, pausing all Machines in coordination with <strong>SEAL911</strong> and external auditors.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Makina 和 Dialectic 在事件发生的早晨被警告。该协议的安全委员会启动了恢复模式，暂停了所有 Machines，并与 <strong>SEAL911</strong> 和外部审计师协调。</p>
</div><p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Screenshot-2026-01-21-at-16.51.44.png" alt="" original-src="https://ambcrypto.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Screenshot-2026-01-21-at-16.51.44.png"/></p>
<p>Source: X</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>来源：X</p>
</div><p>Hypernative alerts flagged suspicious activity one block before the exploit, which was ultimately executed by a second address identified as an <strong>MEV bot</strong>.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Hypernative 警报在攻击发生前一个区块标记了可疑活动，最终由一个被识别为 <strong>MEV 机器人</strong> 的第二个地址执行了攻击。</p>
</div><p>Makina said it has identified the root cause and taken steps to prevent further losses. Also, it is pursuing recovery efforts, including engagement with addresses linked to the exploit.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Makina 表示已识别出根本原因，并采取措施防止进一步损失。此外，它正在进行恢复工作，包括与与攻击相关的地址进行接触。</p>
</div><p>Snapshots of the affected pool have been taken, with affected liquidity providers [LPs] advised to withdraw single-sided to DUSD while recovery continues.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>已对受影响的池进行了快照，建议受影响的流动性提供者 [LPs] 在恢复期间单边提取至 DUSD。</p>
</div><p>A full post-mortem is expected once investigations are complete.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>一旦调查完成，预计将发布完整的事后分析。</p>
</div><h2><strong>January 2026: a familiar pattern of DeFi exploits</strong></h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2><strong>2026 年 1 月：去中心化金融攻击的熟悉模式</strong></h2>
</div><p>Makina’s incident is one of several notable protocol-level exploits recorded so far this year. While the underlying attack methods vary, most losses stem from <strong>logic errors</strong>, <strong>configuration risks</strong>, or <strong>legacy contract assumptions</strong>, rather than novel exploit techniques.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>Makina 的事件是今年迄今为止记录的几起显著协议级攻击之一。虽然基础攻击方法各不相同，但大多数损失源于 <strong>逻辑错误</strong>、<strong>配置风险</strong> 或 <strong>遗留合约假设</strong>，而非新型攻击技术。</p>
</div><p>Among the largest incidents reported in January:</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>1 月报告的最大事件包括：</p>
</div><ul>
<li><strong>Truebit [8 January]</strong>: Approximately <strong>$26 million</strong> was lost due to a flaw tied to legacy bytecode and bonding-curve mechanics, making it the largest exploit of 2026 so far.</li>
<li><strong>YO Protocol [13–14 January]</strong>: Roughly <strong>$3.7 million</strong> was drained in what was described as a slippage-related exploit or operator-level misconfiguration.</li>
<li><strong>TMXTribe [early January]</strong>: About <strong>$1.4 million</strong> was lost due to a logic bug within the protocol.</li>
</ul>
<div class="lb-trans"><ul>
<li><strong>Truebit [1 月 8 日]</strong>：由于与遗留字节码和绑定曲线机制相关的缺陷，损失约为 <strong>2600 万美元</strong>，成为 2026 年迄今为止最大的攻击事件。</li>
<li><strong>YO Protocol [1 月 13-14 日]</strong>：约 <strong>370 万美元</strong> 因被描述为滑点相关的攻击或操作级配置错误而被抽走。</li>
<li><strong>TMXTribe [1 月初]</strong>：由于协议中的逻辑错误，损失约为 <strong>140 万美元</strong>。</li>
</ul>
</div><p>Smaller incidents were also reported across the sector, though many involved limited losses or user-side wallet compromises rather than core protocol failures.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>该领域还报告了一些较小的事件，尽管许多涉及的损失有限或用户侧钱包被攻破，而非核心协议失败。</p>
</div><h2><strong>Losses concentrated in a handful of incidents</strong></h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2><strong>损失集中在少数事件中</strong></h2>
</div><p>While more than half a dozen security events have been reported since the start of the year, total losses remain heavily concentrated in a small number of exploits.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>尽管自年初以来报告了超过七起安全事件，但总损失仍然高度集中在少数攻击中。</p>
</div><p>Truebit alone accounts for a significant share of reported losses, with Makina and YO Protocol forming the second tier of impact.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>仅 Truebit 就占据了报告损失的显著份额，而 Makina 和 YO Protocol 则形成了第二层影响。</p>
</div><p>This concentration suggests that, while exploit frequency remains elevated, systemic risk is still driven by a few high-impact failures rather than widespread protocol failures.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>这种集中表明，尽管攻击频率仍然较高，但系统性风险仍然由少数高影响的失败驱动，而非广泛的协议失败。</p>
</div><hr/>
<div class="lb-trans"><hr/>
</div><h2><strong>Final Thoughts</strong></h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2><strong>最后的思考</strong></h2>
</div><ul>
<li>Early 2026 exploits show that familiar DeFi failure modes are persisting, with losses driven by scale rather than new attack techniques.</li>
<li>Makina’s incident underscores the importance of MEV-aware design and rapid-response frameworks as protocol complexity increases.</li>
</ul>
<div class="lb-trans"><ul>
<li>2026 年初的攻击显示，熟悉的去中心化金融失败模式仍在持续，损失是由规模驱动的，而非新攻击技术。</li>
<li>Makina 的事件强调了在协议复杂性增加时，MEV 意识设计和快速响应框架的重要性。</li>
</ul>
</div><hr/>
<div class="lb-trans"><hr/>
</div>

Makina exploit adds to growing list of DeFi attacks in early 2026

- DeFi 协议 Makina 于 1 月 20 日遭到攻击，损失超过 420 万美元。  
- 攻击影响了 DUSD/USDC Curve 池的流动性提供者，未影响其他用户和资金。  
- 此事件反映出 DeFi 安全事件在 2026 年继续增加，提示需加强协议设计。

Makina 漏洞事件为 2026 年初不断增长的 DeFi 攻击名单再添一例