Bridged NIGHT has been hit by a fast-moving Wanchain bridge incident, with 515M tokens reportedly entering Cardano and being sold across DEXs. In this episode, I break down what is known so far, why Midnight says its network was not the source of the issue, and why bridge risk matters.
Strange that Hoskinson claims that “we” always predicted that this would happen, while his companies/projects were very much celebrating the listing of NIGHT on Binance Alpha in December. They should have known that that was dependent on the bridge and should have warned about it if they are as incredibly smart as he claims:
Hard to find any details if the listing on Binance proper in March still used the bridged/wrapped assets or if they now support CNTs natively. Under normal circumstances, users do not care too much.
This incident also shows how difficult it can be for ordinary users to distinguish between a native asset and a bridged representation of that asset.
Most users see the same token name and symbol and reasonably assume the underlying risk is the same. Wallets, exchanges and token explorers could help by showing the originating network, bridge or contract, and a clear warning when an asset depends on external bridge custody.
From a wallet-support perspective, what information would the community find most useful before receiving or swapping a bridged asset: origin chain, bridge provider, verified asset status, contract address, or a direct risk warning?
