Platypus Finance Unchecked Stablecoin Collateral
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!
Platypus has introduced a new kind of AMM for stableswap that manages risk autonomously based on the coverage ratio. The new design is intended to solve the problem of liquidity fragmentation and to simplify pool compositions, leading to a better user experience. Platypus recently launched its own stablecoin, USP, but the mechanism was attacked, depegging USP and leaving it heavily undercollateralized. The hack was due to a flaw in USP's solvency check mechanism that allowed the attacker to withdraw the supplied collateral while keeping the borrowed USP. The stolen $8.5M remain in the hacker's contract, of which, $1.5M of stolen USDT has been blacklisted. The culprit has been identified, and the Platypus team is setting up a bounty and encouraging the hacker to reach out to them.
This is a global/international case not involving a specific country.[1][2][3][4]
About Platypus Finance
"This Changes Everything. A whole new kind of AMM for stableswap. Lower Slippage. Simpler UX."
"One of the major problems found in the first generation stableswaps’ Closed liquidity pools is liquidity fragmentation, where the liquidity of different pools cannot be shared with one another, resulting in higher slippage."
"The design of other stableswaps requires multiple tokens of equal value within a pool, often complicating its pool compositions (pairing up LP token with new tokens). It significantly hinders the scalability of the protocol and leads to bad user experience."
"Platypus invents a whole new AMM on Avalanche - Open liquidity single-sided AMM managing risk autonomously based on the coverage ratio, allowing maximal capital efficiency."
"The key concept underpinning Platypus’ design is asset liability management (ALM). Platypus is the first of its kind to use a single-variant slippage function instead of invariant curves."
"A highly-specialised creature may be well suited to its own habitat, but Platypus’ attempts to adapt have ended up dead in the water.
Adding to its existing stableswap AMM platform, Platypus recently launched its own stablecoin, USP. However, just 10 days after launch, the new mechanism was attacked, depegging USP and leaving it heavily undercollateralised."
"Dear Community,
We regret to inform you that our protocol was hacked recently, and the attacker took advantage of a flaw in our USP solvency check mechanism. They used a flashloan to exploit a logic error in the USP solvency check mechanism in the contract holding the collateral."
"The attacker first took a flash loan of 44M USDC which was deposited into Platypus. The resulting LP tokens were then used as collateral to borrow 41.7M USP.
The emergencyWithdraw() function only checks whether the user’s position is currently solvent, but neglects to first check against any the effect of any borrowed funds. This allows the attacker to withdraw the supplied collateral while keeping the borrowed USP.
The collateral was then withdrawn to repay the flash loan, and the USP was swapped via Platypus pools, draining the existing liquidity of other stables (USDC, USDT, DAI, BUSD, etc.)."
"The hack has left USP depegged by over 50% as the attacker swapped the USP for other stables. The stolen $8.5M remain in the hacker’s contract, of which, $1.5M of stolen USDT has been blacklisted."
"The rather simple vulnerability, combined with the loot being left (or possibly trapped) as freezable, centralised stables suggests this heist may have been pulled off by a relatively inexperienced amateur."
"After just a few hours, fellow platypus ZachXBT managed to identify the culprit via their ENS address, linked to the exploiter’s transaction history. The same alias was used for now-deleted Twitter and Instagram accounts. The Platypus team have since appealed to the doxxed exploiter:
We're in the process of setting up a bounty & encourage the hacker to reach out to us. We also welcome anyone with useful information to come forward to us."
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 |
|---|---|---|
| February 16th, 2023 12:16:54 PM MST | Exploit Transaction | The exploit transaction on the Avalanche blockchain. |
Technical Details
This section includes specific detailed technical analysis of any security breaches which happened. What specific software vulnerabilities contributed to the problem and how were they exploited?
Total Amount Lost
The total amount lost has been estimated at $8,500,000 USD.
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?
Individual Prevention Policies
No specific policies for individual prevention have yet been identified in this case.
For the full list of how to protect your funds as an individual, check our Prevention Policies for Individuals guide.
Platform Prevention Policies
Policies for platforms to take to prevent this situation have not yet been selected in this case.
For the full list of how to protect your funds as a financial service, check our Prevention Policies for Platforms guide.
Regulatory Prevention Policies
No specific regulatory policies have yet been identified in this case.
For the full list of regulatory policies that can prevent loss, check our Prevention Policies for Regulators guide.
References
- ↑ Platypus - A Novel StableSwap: simple, flexible and scalable (May 3, 2023)
- ↑ Rekt - Platypus Finance - REKT (May 3, 2023)
- ↑ @Platypusdefi Twitter (May 3, 2023)
- ↑ Avalanche Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | SnowTrace (May 3, 2023)