Base Vault's $6 million vulnerability exposure disclosure gap: Immunefi

Base金库遭600万美元漏洞攻击，暴露出漏洞报告机制的缺失

据Immunefi安全主管表示，一起发生在不明Base金库的600万美元漏洞利用事件，揭示了当前漏洞报告体系中存在的重大缺口。在事件简报发布时，该金库内仍有约3170万美元资产留存。

此次事件中，恶意合约获取了金库访问权限，导致约600万美元的wstETH被窃取。截至事件发生超过24小时后，七名Safe多签钱包签名者身份仍未查明，且未见任何团队公开回应。

白帽研究员面临法律风险，缺乏明确披露渠道

Immunefi安全负责人Gonçalo Magalhães向crypto.news指出，由于金库运营方身份不明，一名白帽研究员在试图解决其白名单弱点时，几乎没有在不面临法律风险的情况下采取行动的选择。

尽管该弱点在前一周已被发现，但研究员并未找到明确的披露渠道。Magalhães表示，虽然漏洞赏金计划本可以捕捉到这一缺陷，但匿名性使得“白帽”行动变得复杂化。

权限设置不当：批准地址可无抵押提取资产

根据TokenPost的报道，攻击者利用Safe多签钱包将恶意合约添加至金库的借贷白名单中。随后，该合约提取了1,783个aBaswstETH，并通过Aave V3将其兑换为等值的wstETH。

Magalhães analysis believes that restricting access to approved addresses appears to provide protection because it is often difficult for attackers to enter the whitelist. However, once the address is approved, the vault allows it to withdraw assets without providing collateral, which effectively constitutes a major security breach.

He emphasized that the white list itself cannot effectively prevent the risks brought by such extraction capabilities. His explanation focuses on what the approved address can do with the funds after it is granted access, not just whether access is restricted.

It is reported that before this exploit, the vault had not executed any Safe transactions for 25 days. Relevant publications speculate that the change in access rights may involve social engineering or internal collusion, but there is no conclusive evidence to confirm it.

Anonymous vaults make bona fide intervention difficult

For researchers who discovered weaknesses, Magalhães said the unknown identity of the vault operator makes any attempt at security intervention full of uncertainty. "Considering that this is an unidentified vault, it will be difficult for White-Hat to take any action that will ensure that it does not get into legal trouble."

He pointed out that the problem is not limited to discovering technical flaws. The unclear ownership of the vault and the approval process that allows threatening participants to enter the white list have raised doubts about its creator. Magalhães called on the person who controlled the wallet to appear and respond, and his continued silence heightened public doubts, but he stressed that it was not direct evidence of his involvement in the theft.

The Importance of Private Disclosure and Bounty Mechanisms

Previously, Immunefi CEO Mitchell Amador discussed private disclosure and authorization issues after the Liquid Network breach. Amador recommended that researchers conduct private reporting through a defined bounty plan, rather than negotiating payments after moving user funds.

In that incident, the unidentified perpetrator returned 3,400 BTC but retained 598.5 BTC. Blockstream rejected its claim of responsible disclosure and rejected its 10% reward request. Amador said the agreement should establish conditions for rescue before an emergency occurs, including actions that researchers can take and reward terms. He also introduced Immunefi's "white hat haven" framework, which aims to set these conditions in advance.

Bug bounty can make up for audit omissions

When asked whether the bounty alone would inevitably prevent the Base attack, Magalhães said that the security community is likely to identify extraction issues in contracts through the bounty program. "The vulnerability bounty will definitely stop this attack because the security community will most likely discover this obvious flaw in smart contracts."

Immunefi stated in a report released on August 10 on the July vulnerability bounty results that researchers received $2.32 million that month for confirmed vulnerabilities. The number of reports confirmed and paid increased 18% from June, and the company said its plan prevented 374 threats.

The report also cited a comparison of Immunefi's audits of 1,178 first-tier companies with 58 competitive audits. Data shows that the competition format found an average of 6.2 serious vulnerabilities each time, while private audits only found 1.5.

Infrastructure is as critical as key management

In addition to contract logic, Magalhães also points out that evidence of infrastructure and key breaches suggests that security checks must cover additional entrances to user funds.

A July 20 report on signers and infrastructure risks cited Hacken's findings: Of the approximately $764 million stolen in the second quarter, 88.3% were attributed to failures in these links. Of the 1,427 projects tracked, only 4% combined audits, active vulnerability bounties and third-party surveillance.

Hacken also identified 14 projects that had been audited but were still exploited. Reports show that reasons for failure include signing devices, administrator keys, bridge validators, and back-end systems outside the scope of traditional censorship.

U.S. indictment shows high cost of unauthorized extraction

In the United States, the Justice Department has indicted a security engineer for using a decentralized exchange and negotiating the return of stolen assets.

In December 2023, federal prosecutors announced that Shakeeb Ahmed had pleaded guilty to hacking two exchanges and obtaining more than $12 million. According to the Justice Department, Ahmed agreed to return the funds to an exchange, but would keep $1.5 million if the exchange did not report the attack to law enforcement.

In a separate Nirvana Finance attack, prosecutors said the agreement provided Ahmed with a reward of up to $600,000 to return stolen assets. But he asked for $1.4 million, but the two sides failed to reach an agreement, and he ended up leaving about $3.6 million in stolen money.