Nemo protocolNemo protocol

Nemo protocol $2.6m exploit caused by developer’s unaudited code

Nemo protocol published a post-mortem report on the exploit that led to the protocol losing $2.59 million. The report revealed that the exploit was caused by a developer’s code that was unaudited by the MoveBit team.

Summary
  • Nemo protocol’s September 7 exploit was the product of an unaudited code sent through by one of their developers.
  • The exploit led to a loss of $2.4 million that was stolen by the hacker, which was later bridged into Ethereum.

Nemo protocol suffered an exploit on September 7 that resulted in the Total Value Locked plummeting from over $6 million to just around $1.5 million. Around $2.4 million had been stolen from Sui (SUI)-based DeFi yield platform protocol in the attack.

Three days later, the platform came back with a post-mortem report that explains what really led to the exploit.

“Today we are releasing our full incident report to provide transparency into our response, including the root cause, learnings, and next steps,” wrote the protocol in a recent post.

According to the report, an unnamed developer unveiled new features without audit approval and proceeded to deploy them. The developer failed to inform the MoveBit auditors that it was a new addition that got mixed into the old audited fixes.

From this weakness, the attacker took advantage of two main elements. First, a flash loan function that was mistakenly left public instead of private. Second, a flawed pricing function that could change internal contract data even though it was supposed to only read data.

These two system flaws combined allowed the hacker to drain assets from Nemo’s liquidity pool. The stolen funds were later bridged to Ethereum (ETH) through Wormhole CCTP, with $2.4 million currently held in the hacker’s active wallet.

How did the Nemo protocol exploit occur?

When the attack happened, the hacker exploited the system’s vulnerabilities to borrow, swap, and mint tokens in a way that manipulated prices and drained the pool. The Nemo team noticed unusual yields that displayed over 30x returns within the first 30 minutes and paused the protocol through a multi-signature wallet.

At this point, most of the stolen funds had already been moved off-chain.

In response, Nemo took steps to patch the vulnerabilities. The flash loan function was removed, and the pricing tool was corrected so that it cannot alter internal data. The team also fixed another related bug that could affect exchange rates. Emergency audits are underway, and the protocol has promised to bring in multiple security firms for independent reviews of the updated code.

In addition, Nemo protocol plans to reset corrupted on-chain data and rebalance their liquidity pools so the protocol can operate normally again.

What are the next steps?

According to the post-mortem report, Nemo is preparing a compensation plan for affected users. The team is also working with exchanges, security firms, and law enforcement to track the stolen assets and prevent the hacker from liquidating the funds.

Nemo is also looking at long-term changes to improve security. These include stricter controls for upgrades, more robust audits, broader bug bounty programs, and a higher focus on transparency.

For the future, the team is committed to building stronger security practices, better accountability, and closer communication with users in order to re-establish trust and resilience.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Why The Green Bay Packers Must Take The Cleveland Browns Seriously — As Hard As That Might Be

Why The Green Bay Packers Must Take The Cleveland Browns Seriously — As Hard As That Might Be

The post Why The Green Bay Packers Must Take The Cleveland Browns Seriously — As Hard As That Might Be appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Jordan Love and the Green Bay Packers are off to a 2-0 start. Getty Images The Green Bay Packers are, once again, one of the NFL’s better teams. The Cleveland Browns are, once again, one of the league’s doormats. It’s why unbeaten Green Bay (2-0) is a 8-point favorite at winless Cleveland (0-2) Sunday according to betmgm.com. The money line is also Green Bay -500. Most expect this to be a Packers’ rout, and it very well could be. But Green Bay knows taking anyone in this league for granted can prove costly. “I think if you look at their roster, the paper, who they have on that team, what they can do, they got a lot of talent and things can turn around quickly for them,” Packers safety Xavier McKinney said. “We just got to kind of keep that in mind and know we not just walking into something and they just going to lay down. That’s not what they going to do.” The Browns certainly haven’t laid down on defense. Far from. Cleveland is allowing an NFL-best 191.5 yards per game. The Browns gave up 141 yards to Cincinnati in Week 1, including just seven in the second half, but still lost, 17-16. Cleveland has given up an NFL-best 45.5 rushing yards per game and just 2.1 rushing yards per attempt. “The biggest thing is our defensive line is much, much improved over last year and I think we’ve got back to our personality,” defensive coordinator Jim Schwartz said recently. “When we play our best, our D-line leads us there as our engine.” The Browns rank third in the league in passing defense, allowing just 146.0 yards per game. Cleveland has also gone 30 straight games without allowing a 300-yard passer, the longest active streak in the NFL.…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:41
Academic Publishing and Fairness: A Game-Theoretic Model of Peer-Review Bias

Academic Publishing and Fairness: A Game-Theoretic Model of Peer-Review Bias

Exploring how biases in the peer-review system impact researchers' choices, showing how principles of fairness relate to the production of scientific knowledge based on topic importance and hardness.
Share
Hackernoon2025/09/17 23:15
The Role of Reference Points in Achieving Equilibrium Efficiency in Fair and Socially Just Economies

The Role of Reference Points in Achieving Equilibrium Efficiency in Fair and Socially Just Economies

This article explores how a simple change in the reference point can achieve a Pareto-efficient equilibrium in both free and fair economies and those with social justice.
Share
Hackernoon2025/09/17 22:30