Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
ETH Kelp DAO 起诉 LayerZero 及其 CEO，指控其应对 2.92 亿美元 rsETH 漏洞事件负责
核心要点：
- Kelp DAO 将跨链消息协议 LayerZero 及其首席执行官 Bryan Pellegrino 列为被告，指控其与一起涉及 rsETH 的 alleged 2.92 亿美元漏洞事件有关。
- 本案处于积极诉讼阶段；尚未达成判决或和解，所有指控目前仅为单方面主张。
- 诉讼将 LayerZero——一种允许在不同网络间传递代币和消息的区块链互操作性协议——定位为 rsETH 事件的责任方。rsETH 是 Kelp DAO 协议发行的流动性再质押代币，代表用户通过该协议存入以太坊的再质押资产。
- Kelp DAO 的法律行动直接点名了作为公司首席执行官的 Pellegrino，这一举措表明投诉不仅限于机构责任，还涉嫌追究个人责任。
诉讼细节与背景
投诉中引用的 2.92 亿美元数字代表了据称漏洞事件的规模，但具体的机制、事件发生日期以及支撑该估值的基础链上交易，在目前的公开记录中仍未得到确认。这些指控尚未经过法庭检验或证实。
LayerZero's previous involvement in decentralized finance (DeFi) security incidents is not an isolated case. After another security incident related to Kelp's infrastructure, Lombard Protocol completely migrated cross-chain messaging for its bitcoin-backed assets from LayerZero to Chainlink's CCIP. This migration illustrates how the fragility of a single bridging layer triggers protocol-level decisions that affect hundreds of millions of dollars in user funds.
What the rsETH vulnerability means to DeFi
rsETH is a liquidity re-pledge token that allows the holder to gain benefits from the Ethereum verifier layer while retaining the ability to deploy the token into various DeFi protocols. If a vulnerability occurs at the bridging or messaging layer affects the way rsETH is cast, destroyed, or transferred across the chain, it may distort the pegged price of the token to its underlying ETH and expose a series of associated agreements to the risk of cascading losses.
The choice to sue interoperability layers rather than smart contract auditors or individual attackers suggests that Kelp DAO's complaints focus on accountability at the infrastructure level. This is a legal theory that, if successful, will have a significant impact on cross-chain bridging operators 'assessment and management of their liability risks.
Cross-chain vulnerabilities have long been one of the most expensive incidents in decentralized finance, and legal holding infrastructure providers accountable remains largely unexplored area. The outcome of this case may affect how the bridge agreement constructs its terms of service, security audits and insurance arrangements in the future. It can be compared to the THORChain vulnerability, which triggered an emergency chain pause, when protocol governance rather than litigation was the main response mechanism.
Follow-up developments in the case
Based on currently available information, LayerZero and Pellegrino have not yet issued a public response to this lawsuit. The defendant will have the opportunity to file a formal defense and the case will proceed in accordance with standard civil litigation procedures, including discovery of evidence, motion practice and potential trial.
Key disclosures to focus on include: court documents specifying the theory of legal liability, alleged specific loophole mechanisms, and any documents on how the $292 million damages were calculated. Whether Kelp DAO seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief, or both will shape the scope of the lawsuit.
The case remains unresolved, and readers concerned about rsETH exposure or LayerZero integration should monitor official court documents for verified developments rather than relying on preliminary reports. From a bitco-first perspective, the lawsuit highlights why Bitcoin's single-layer, smart-less contract architecture has a fundamentally different risk profile than the multi-layered DeFi stack built on top of Ethereum's re-pledge infrastructure.
