#hackermintstokensaftersingularitynetexploit Community Insights & Market Sentiment

SingularityNET bridge exploited: issuing more tokens than the price is even more frightening—I'm only observing FET, not buying the dip

My stance is very clear: before this type of security incident has a complete post-mortem, I won’t rush into FET just because the price rebounds. On Binance Square, there are currently #HackerMintsTokensAfterSingularityNETExploit trending topics. The core issue isn’t the simple four words “contract was hacked.” It’s that the attacker is suspected of using compromised signatures or administrative permissions to generate unauthorized supply across multiple tokens in the relevant ecosystem, and then withdraw FET from the conversion contract. Once the authenticity of the supply is compromised, a rebound on the price chart doesn’t automatically restore trust.

What can be verified so far should be separated into different layers. According to Bitquery’s on-chain investigation and statistics, the same attack cluster involved the unauthorized minting of about 2.3 billion units of AGIX, NTX, CGV, and WMTx, and about 8.72 million FET were taken from the Fetch.ai conversion contract. In addition, a large portion of this so-called “paper value” can’t be liquidated at normal market prices because the corresponding liquidity pools are thin. Fetch.ai has publicly stated that the main target was the SingularityNET bridge between Ethereum and Cardano; the AGIX to FET conversion has been paused. Its own contracts are not currently found to be at risk, and the FET network is still operating normally. This is the project team’s interim statement—it doesn’t equal the final root-cause report, and it also doesn’t mean that all related asset risks have been fully cleared.

The market reaction is also interesting. OKX’s FET perpetuals 24-hour range is about $0.1671–$0.1833; at the time of recording it’s around $0.1804, which is actually higher than near the day’s open. The funding rate is about +0.005%, and the notional value of open interest is about $610,000. This suggests the price is repairing itself, but the position size isn’t large and the incident information is still being updated. At this point, it’s too quick to infer “risk has ended” just because it didn’t keep falling. Any change—whether the attacker’s assets have been frozen, how cross-chain supplies are rolled back, how exchanges handle deposits, and the official final compensation and migration plan—could reprice the market again.

If I were trading myself, I would be observing FET only—my position is 0. I would only consider a small spot position of no more than 1.5% of principal after the project releases a verifiable final post-mortem: clearly stating the affected contracts, the snapshot, how the supply was handled, and the recovery timeline; plus when the price expands volume and holds above 0.1835, then pulls back and holds the 0.1800–0.1820 area. The first target is 0.1880, the second target is 0.1950; at the first target I’ll cut the position in half. After entering, if it drops back below 0.1780, I’ll reduce first; if the 1-hour close loses 0.1750, I’ll exit completely and won’t average down.

If the price first breaks below 0.1750, I also won’t chase a short on the back of this security incident, because announcements and freeze-related news could trigger a reversal shock within moments. I’ll wait to see whether new support forms around 0.1670, or simply abandon this leg. What truly overturns a cautious judgment isn’t a single bullish candle—it’s when the official team completes supply verification, restores the conversion, and the price stabilizes above 0.1835. In security incidents, surviving matters more than guessing the absolute lowest point.

#HackerMintsTokensAfterSingularityNETExploit $FET

The above is only my personal market observation and does not constitute investment advice.

Markslo

Very good
🧧🧧🧧🧧
$AAPLB
#HackerMintsTokensAfterSingularityNETExploit

灼见

🚨 BTC breaks above $80K, but the real war is only just beginning.

Now the market is showing a very interesting standoff:

Wall Street is buying, but macro data is hitting the brakes.

On one side:

💰 Spot BTC ETF daily net inflows of about $433M
🔥 $BTC continues to hold above $80K
🏦 Institutional capital is flowing back in

On the other side:

📈 The U.S. 2-year Treasury yield rises to about 4.76%
🏦 The Fed continues to send hawkish signals
💧 Global liquidity is still under pressure

Under normal circumstances, high interest rates + a strong dollar is not an environment BTC likes.

But this time—

BTC simply hasn’t been dragged back down.

That’s the most worth watching thing today.

Next, I’m only watching one level:

$80,000

If macro pressure keeps rising and BTC can still hold onto 80K,

then it may suggest that:

ETF and institutional buying is gradually overpowering macro headwinds.

But if 80K is lost again, then we’ll need to reassess this breakout.

The market isn’t just about long vs. short anymore.

It’s now:

ETF BUYING VS. MACRO PRESSURE

👇 Who do you think will win in the end?

Institutional flow 🟢 / Macro pressure 🔴

#BTC #ETH #BNB

AAPLB+0.73%

عادل مصطفى عيد منصور :

AAPLB

hackermintstokensaftersingularitynetexploit

Trending Topics