$160M in stolen funds puts Sui’s decentralization to the test

Response to the DEX exploit reveals tensions between credible neutrality and crimefighting

article-image

VERSUSstudio/Shutterstock and Adobe modified by Blockworks

share

This is a segment from the 0xResearch newsletter. To read full editions, subscribe.


Sui’s largest decentralized exchange, Cetus, was exploited on May 22 for over $220 million — the most severe DeFi incident in the network’s short history. It raised difficult questions about validator power, decentralization and reactive governance.

The attacker exploited faulty math in Cetus’ smart contracts by using spoofed tokens and miscalculated liquidity ratios. By injecting near-zero value assets into pools and then withdrawing large amounts of real tokens like SUI and USDC, the exploiter drained about $223 million before the protocol was paused. As Mysten Labs co-founder Adeniyi Abiodun clarified in an X space, “it’s not a bug in Sui consensus, it’s not a bug in Move,” thus isolating the issue to Cetus’ application logic.

But the response drew nearly as much attention as the attack itself. In coordination with the Sui Foundation, validators quickly updated a configuration file in the code powering the network, tailored to reject transactions from the attacker’s wallet. This off-chain coordination didn’t require a vote or protocol-level upgrade, but has resulted in $160 million in stolen assets being frozen.

A brief GitHub pull request from Mysten Labs proposed going a step further: adding an “allow list” feature to execute a pre-chosen “recovery” transaction that would bypass signature checks. The PR was withdrawn within hours after community backlash, and validators have so far limited their action to censorship, not confiscation.

“Sui is a decentralized network, so neither Mysten Labs nor Sui Foundation has the ability to block addresses or transactions, ‘control’ validators, or otherwise dictate the behavior of independent actors on Sui,” a Sui Foundation rep told Blockworks.

Still, the episode has reopened a fundamental debate about decentralization: Should a blockchain’s validators ever freeze or seize funds, even in cases of clear theft?

Critics argue that such ad hoc measures threaten Sui’s credibility as a decentralized base layer. “Taking a heavily opinionated stance to censor due to a third-party app exploit is a slippery slope,” warned Blockworks Advisory’s David Rodriguez. Others pointed out the danger of setting a precedent that could be abused in future incidents — or compelled by regulators.

Without onchain checks or governance processes, any validator coordination hinges entirely on informal consensus and the economic gravity of Sui Foundation signals. After all, validators require a 30 million SUI bond, so strong suggestions from on high might well be the same as “a $114m gun pointing at their heads.”

Move is not a silver bullet

The incident also exposed broader risk beyond Cetus. According to security firm Verichains, three other major Sui protocols — Kriya, FlowX and Turbo Finance — were previously vulnerable to the same math flaw exploited from the latest attack. While Kriya and FlowX patched their contracts, Verichains warned that Turbo Finance still contains the vulnerable code, albeit not actively in use.

“Dead code is not safe code,” Verichains mused.

Verichains’ findings reinforce the idea that while Move-based smart contracts and VM offer stronger technical primitives, in practice, security still depends on shared libraries, developer diligence and tooling maturity.

Looking ahead, several developers and researchers have called for a formal, transparent policy on validator powers and emergency responses.

Aave governance lead Marc Zeller expressed the view that the centralized powers on display would make DeFi protocols wary, writing “[you] can be sure Aave will never deploy on Sui.”

Sui may have preserved some value this time (the hacker still exfiltrated some $60 million), but its long-term reputation will depend on whether it can set clear limits — and build credible neutrality — into the system itself.


Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters:

Tags

Decoding crypto and the markets. Daily, with Byron Gilliam.

Upcoming Events

Javits Center North | 445 11th Ave

Tues - Thurs, March 24 - 26, 2026

Blockworks’ Digital Asset Summit (DAS) will feature conversations between the builders, allocators, and legislators who will shape the trajectory of the digital asset ecosystem in the US and abroad.

recent research

Flying_Tulip.png

Research

Flying Tulip's perpetual put option provides real principal protection, but investors must pay a valuation premium today for products that have to be built over the next 24 months. This structure works best as a stablecoin substitute where the put allows continuous monitoring—accept opportunity cost in exchange for asymmetric upside if the team executes on its ambitious cross-collateral architecture.

article-image

As flows consolidate and volatility fades, finding edge now means knowing which games are still worth playing

article-image

Value distribution came to $1.9 billion distributed in Q3, though total revenues have yet to beat 2021 heights

article-image

MegaETH public sale auction ends tomorrow, and the free money machine has attracted people who like free money

article-image

With tBTC under the hood, Acre abstracts bridging and converts non-BTC rewards to bitcoin

article-image

Accountable is also eyeing mid-November for mainnet launch

article-image

“Adjusted for size, I think it may be the most successful ETP launch of all time,” Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan says