Mike Tyson once said, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” The blockchain ecosystem has taken its share of punches, and the results have been devastating.
Take the recent $1.4 billion hack of Bybit, for example. The incident sent shockwaves through the industry, raising uncomfortable questions like, If blockchain is so secure, why are hacks still happening?
As the hack's effects continue to unravel, we must tackle the elephant in the room—one that is less often mentioned but powerful enough to break the fabric on which Web3 has thrived for many years.
Web3 was sold as secure, decentralized, and completely private, but what we see daily paints a different story, one of constant hacks.
Where did we get it wrong?
I asked some of the pros and top voices in the ecosystem, and their answers are a narration of long, complex armor codes and yet bullseyes all the time when the hackers strike.
According to Cyfrin, many projects have embarked on security audits, making security researchers one of the most lucrative skill sets today.
Protocols continue to run private and public audits to ensure validation and some sense of security at the code level. Are these the fixes we so desperately need, or are they just short-term solutions to long-term problems?
To find the answer, we must look at the problem.
The problem?
Blockchain was marketed as a Fort Knox-like solution—decentralized, immutable, and unbreakable. But the reality is far more nuanced. While the blockchain itself is secure, the ecosystem surrounding it is not.
Donald Trump once remarked, “Blockchain and crypto are the future, but their security challenges must be addressed for them to reach their full potential.” He was right. Smart contracts still have bugs, bridges are currently exploited, and users can make mistakes and have next to zero security against rug pulls. We are nowhere near secure.
The ecosystem built around blockchain—smart contracts, decentralized applications (dApps), bridges, and decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms—has introduced vulnerabilities that have led to significant exploits.
Side Note:
- Bitcoin’s blockchain has never been hacked in its 14-year history.
- The immutability of blockchain ensures that once data is recorded, it cannot be altered without consensus from the network.
However, the security of the blockchain itself is only one piece of the puzzle. The real vulnerabilities lie in the layers built on top and the technologies surrounding it. So who sold us one truth and one lie?
The Illusion of Absolute Security
Let’s start with a hard truth: no system is 100% secure. Not even blockchain. While blockchain’s design makes it inherently resistant to tampering and fraud, it’s not immune to vulnerabilities.
History has repeatedly shown that even the most robust systems have weak spots, from 51% attacks on smaller networks to high-profile smart contract exploits like the infamous DAO hack and, more recently, Bybit.
These incidents underscore a critical point: no technology, no matter how revolutionary, can guarantee absolute security.
For example:
- A decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol handling billions of dollars needs a higher level of security than a small-scale NFT project.
- A private blockchain used by a corporation may prioritize different security measures than a public, permissionless blockchain like Bitcoin or Ethereum.
The reality is that security is not a one-size-fits-all. It’s a spectrum, and where you land on that spectrum depends on your use case, risk tolerance, and the value of what you’re protecting.
The illusion of absolute security arises when we overlook these nuances, assuming that a single solution, pattern, or technology can address all potential threats. In reality, security is an ongoing process of assessment, adaptation, and vigilance, requiring a deep understanding of the unique dynamics at play in each context.
The answer is not whether Web3 can be made completely secure—it cannot—but rather how to balance the trade-offs between security, functionality, and usability in a way that aligns with the specific needs and risks of the situation.
The Human Trade-Off
One of the biggest challenges in blockchain is balancing security with other critical factors like scalability, usability, and decentralization—often referred to as the blockchain trilemma; however, humans top the list of trade-offs.
The reality that humans are ultimately responsible for managing any security architecture inherently undermines the reliability of total security. Humans are prone to errors, and history has repeatedly demonstrated that human mistakes have been among the most costly factors in security breaches to date.
Consider the following:
- Lost Private Keys: If you lose access to your private keys or store them on your contract, your funds are gone forever—no matter how secure the blockchain or smart contract is.
- Social Engineering: Scammers don’t need to hack the blockchain; they just need to trick you into giving up your credentials.
- Centralized Points of Failure: Exchanges and custodial services, which many users rely on, are frequent targets for hacks.
Security audits, while valuable, are not a silver bullet. They can identify vulnerabilities at the code level, but they can’t account for human behavior. The DAO hack, the Bybit breach, and countless other incidents serve as stark reminders that no system is 100% secure. The belief that blockchain is impervious to attacks is a dangerous mirage.
However, humans have always resorted to finding solutions in the most trying hours, and I believe the future of tomorrow's protocol must rely on an integrated security model that focuses on not just the product but the system as well.
Finding the Right Solution
After sampling different solutions on how projects can match up and become more secure, I concluded that security must be directly integrated into the deployment of any project.
Like a prison, security mechanisms must act as watchtowers, overlooking the projects and reviewing changes that alter how the project operates, and one solution that has figured it out is Drosera.
Drosera: A Security Solution
Drosera traps can enhance the security process, offering an alternative or complement to traditional audits. These traps are designed to detect and respond to malicious activities in real time, providing an additional layer of protection.
To better understand how Drosera’s approach could be applied in real-world scenarios, I asked Jon, a Senior Blockchain Developer at Drosera, what they would have done differently in the case of the Bybit hack. Here’s his response:
“Traps absolutely would have helped in this situation because the problem was the implementation of a proxy contract being changed through a delegate call. It's not a sophisticated attack, but a trap could have been watching for changes in the implementation contract, detecting attackers trying to upgrade contract logic.”
This aligns with my assessment that security must be built as part of the product and integrated into every call, function or contract not reactively reviewed or subjectively analysed, as this would mean the difference between saving billions of dollars or losing it all to silly hacks.
The Future Ahead
The future of blockchain security isn’t about achieving perfection; it’s about continuous improvement and adaptation. Here’s how we can move forward:
- Education and Awareness: Users must be educated on best practices, from key management to recognizing phishing attempts. Empowering individuals with knowledge is the first line of defense against human error.
- Layered Security Approaches: No single solution can address all threats. A multi-layered approach—combining ZKPs, multi-signature wallets, DIDs, audits, and real-time monitoring—creates a more resilient ecosystem.
- Human-Centric Design: Systems should be designed with human fallibility in mind. This means simplifying complex processes, reducing the risk of mistakes, and providing clear recovery options when errors occur.
- Continuous Monitoring and Adaptation: Security is not a one-time effort. It requires ongoing assessment, adaptation, and vigilance to stay ahead of emerging threats. ## Conclusion
The story of Blockchain security is, at its core, a story about humans. We are the architects of this technology, but we are also its greatest vulnerability. The illusion of absolute static security has been shattered, not only by flaws in the code, but by the inevitability of human error.
The question isn’t whether blockchain can be made completely secure—it can’t. The question is how we can design systems that account for human fallibility, mitigate risks, and strike a balance between security, functionality, and usability.
Only by embracing the human factor and build more Continuous Integrated and Deployment (CI/CD) security infrastructure can we hope to build a more resilient and trustworthy ecosystem.
Top comments (0)