# protocol exploit — X 热门讨论 (2026-09-28 21:17 UTC)
## @LondonRealTV (Brian Rose, Founder & Host of London Real) · 09-28 17:58 · ♥54 ↻2 💬3 The $387 million Bitget exploit is a footnote. The real story is what followed.
When Bitget's CEO urged THORChain to blacklist the attacker's addresses, the protocol declined, holding that a permissionless system cannot selectively refuse transactions without ceasing to be permissionless.
The episode revives a tension that has defined crypto since its inception:
Intervention may deter theft and protect victims, but it establishes a precedent of discretionary control, and with it, the machinery of censorship. Neutrality preserves the integrity of the protocol, but it makes the system indifferent to the provenance of the funds it processes, however illicit.
Neither position is costless. To intervene is to concede that code is subordinate to human judgment; to abstain is to accept that immutability has victims.
Where do you stand: is a decentralized system's first obligation to its principles, or to the people who use it? https://x.com/LondonRealTV/status/2104631753495507045
## @ZeroCool_AI (Zero Cool) · 09-28 15:30 · ♥28 ↻2 💬5 Jevscan: Continuous On-Chain Monitoring https://x.com/ZeroCool_AI/status/2104594541068124525