Uniswap Counterfeit SRM: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "{{Imported Case Study|source=https://www.quadrigainitiative.com/casestudy/uniswapcounterfeitsrm.php}} thumb|UniswapOne of the challenges with open-ended protocols like Uniswap is that scammers could impersonate existing tokens, getting money for smoke. In the case of the Serum project, they hadn't even launched yet, and investors got duped into purchasing something which wasn't actual Serum. This is a global/international case not involving a spec...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Imported Case Study|source=https://www.quadrigainitiative.com/casestudy/uniswapcounterfeitsrm.php}} | {{Imported Case Study|source=https://www.quadrigainitiative.com/casestudy/uniswapcounterfeitsrm.php}} | ||
{{Unattributed Sources}} | |||
[[File:Uniswap.jpg|thumb|Uniswap]]One of the challenges with open-ended protocols like Uniswap is that scammers could impersonate existing tokens, getting money for smoke. | [[File:Uniswap.jpg|thumb|Uniswap]]One of the challenges with open-ended protocols like Uniswap is that scammers could impersonate existing tokens, getting money for smoke. | ||
| Line 6: | Line 7: | ||
This is a global/international case not involving a specific country. | This is a global/international case not involving a specific country. | ||
<ref name="blockcast-1316" /><ref name="projectserumtwitter-1546" /><ref name="cryptopost-1547" /> | |||
== About Uniswap == | == About Uniswap == | ||
| Line 29: | Line 31: | ||
Don't Include: | Don't Include: | ||
* Any wording which directly states or implies that the business is/was illegitimate, or that a vulnerability existed. | * Any wording which directly states or implies that the business is/was illegitimate, or that a vulnerability existed. | ||
* Anything that wasn't reasonably knowable at the time of the event. | * Anything that wasn't reasonably knowable at the time of the event. | ||
| Line 51: | Line 52: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|August 6th, 2020 12:00:00 AM | |August 6th, 2020 12:00:00 AM | ||
| | |Main Event | ||
| | |Expand this into a brief description of what happened and the impact. If multiple lines are necessary, add them here. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 75: | Line 72: | ||
== Total Amount Recovered == | == Total Amount Recovered == | ||
There do not appear to have been any funds recovered in this case. | |||
What funds were recovered? What funds were reimbursed for those affected users? | What funds were recovered? What funds were reimbursed for those affected users? | ||
| Line 86: | Line 83: | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
[https://blockcast.cc/news/chengdu-lianan-in-august-there-were-5-security-incidents-in-the-defi-field-and-a-total-of-39-incidents-in-the-blockchain-field/ Chengdu Lianan: In August, there were 5 security incidents in the DeFi field, and a total of 39 incidents in the blockchain field • Blockcast.cc- News on Blockchain, DLT, Cryptocurrency] (Jun 12) | <references><ref name="blockcast-1316">[https://blockcast.cc/news/chengdu-lianan-in-august-there-were-5-security-incidents-in-the-defi-field-and-a-total-of-39-incidents-in-the-blockchain-field/ Chengdu Lianan: In August, there were 5 security incidents in the DeFi field, and a total of 39 incidents in the blockchain field • Blockcast.cc- News on Blockchain, DLT, Cryptocurrency] (Jun 12, 2021)</ref> | ||
[https://twitter.com/ProjectSerum/status/1291538489457041408 @ProjectSerum Twitter] (Jul 10) | <ref name="projectserumtwitter-1546">[https://twitter.com/ProjectSerum/status/1291538489457041408 @ProjectSerum Twitter] (Jul 10, 2021)</ref> | ||
[https://cryptopost.com/uniswaps-daily-volume-nudges-25m-despite-scam-token-concerns/ Uniswap’s Daily Volume Nudges $25M Despite Scam Token Concerns | CryptoPost] (Jul 10) | <ref name="cryptopost-1547">[https://cryptopost.com/uniswaps-daily-volume-nudges-25m-despite-scam-token-concerns/ Uniswap’s Daily Volume Nudges $25M Despite Scam Token Concerns | CryptoPost] (Jul 10, 2021)</ref></references> | ||
Revision as of 10:51, 22 February 2023
Notice: This page is a freshly imported case study from the original repository. The original content was in a different format, and may not have relevant information for all sections. Please help restructure the content by moving information from the 'About' section to other sections, and add any missing information or sources you can find. If you are new here, please read General Tutorial on Wikis or Anatomy of a Case Study for help getting started.
Notice: This page contains sources which are not attributed to any text. The unattributed sources follow the initial description. Please assist by visiting each source, reviewing the content, and placing that reference next to any text it can be used to support. Feel free to add any information that you come across which isn't present already. Sources which don't contain any relevant information can be removed. Broken links can be replaced with versions from the Internet Archive. See General Tutorial on Wikis, Anatomy of a Case Study, and/or Citing Your Sources Guide for additional information. Thanks for your help!
One of the challenges with open-ended protocols like Uniswap is that scammers could impersonate existing tokens, getting money for smoke.
In the case of the Serum project, they hadn't even launched yet, and investors got duped into purchasing something which wasn't actual Serum.
This is a global/international case not involving a specific country. [1][2][3]
About Uniswap
"On August 7, Uniswap had counterfeit SRM currency, and users were deceived. Serum issued a tweet to remind users to be vigilant. SRMs appearing on trading platforms (such as Uniswap, etc.) other than FTX and BitMax platforms are all counterfeit."
"There is NO SRM trading anywhere right now! If you see "SRM" on Uniswap etc., it's fake."
"There will be NO SRM trading anywhere except the IEOs on FTX and BitMax until Tuesday the 11th."
This is a global/international case not involving a specific country.
The background of the exchange platform, service, or individuals involved, as it would have been seen or understood at the time of the events.
Include:
- Known history of when and how the service was started.
- What problems does the company or service claim to solve?
- What marketing materials were used by the firm or business?
- Audits performed, and excerpts that may have been included.
- Business registration documents shown (fake or legitimate).
- How were people recruited to participate?
- Public warnings and announcements prior to the event.
Don't Include:
- Any wording which directly states or implies that the business is/was illegitimate, or that a vulnerability existed.
- Anything that wasn't reasonably knowable at the time of the event.
There could be more than one section here. If the same platform is involved with multiple incidents, then it can be linked to a main article page.
The Reality
This sections is included if a case involved deception or information that was unknown at the time. Examples include:
- When the service was actually started (if different than the "official story").
- Who actually ran a service and their own personal history.
- How the service was structured behind the scenes. (For example, there was no "trading bot".)
- Details of what audits reported and how vulnerabilities were missed during auditing.
What Happened
The specific events of the loss and how it came about. What actually happened to cause the loss and some of the events leading up to it.
| Date | Event | Description |
|---|---|---|
| August 6th, 2020 12:00:00 AM | Main Event | Expand this into a brief description of what happened and the impact. If multiple lines are necessary, add them here. |
Total Amount Lost
The total amount lost is unknown.
How much was lost and how was it calculated? If there are conflicting reports, which are accurate and where does the discrepancy lie?
Immediate Reactions
How did the various parties involved (firm, platform, management, and/or affected individual(s)) deal with the events? Were services shut down? Were announcements made? Were groups formed?
Ultimate Outcome
What was the end result? Was any investigation done? Were any individuals prosecuted? Was there a lawsuit? Was any tracing done?
Total Amount Recovered
There do not appear to have been any funds recovered in this case.
What funds were recovered? What funds were reimbursed for those affected users?
Ongoing Developments
What parts of this case are still remaining to be concluded?
Prevention Policies
Validating the legitimacy of assets on platforms is relatively easy for an experienced validator, and therefore incidents like this could be entirely prevented.
References
- ↑ Chengdu Lianan: In August, there were 5 security incidents in the DeFi field, and a total of 39 incidents in the blockchain field • Blockcast.cc- News on Blockchain, DLT, Cryptocurrency (Jun 12, 2021)
- ↑ @ProjectSerum Twitter (Jul 10, 2021)
- ↑ Uniswap’s Daily Volume Nudges $25M Despite Scam Token Concerns | CryptoPost (Jul 10, 2021)