Connect with us

Published

on

The case for enterprise-grade custody solutions

Opinion by: Vikash Singh, Principal Investor at Stillmark

The Bybit hack resulted in the largest loss of funds to cyber hackers by a cryptocurrency exchange in history. It served as a wake-up call for those complacent about the state of security threats in the digital assets space. Everyone must learn the lesson from this heist — enterprise-grade custody solutions require tech to be accompanied by transparency.

Unlike many previous incidents, this loss of funds was not due to a faulty smart contract, lost/mismanaged keys or deliberate mismanagement or rehypothecation of user funds, but rather a sophisticated social engineering attack that exploited vulnerabilities in operational security. 

This hack differs from earlier eras because it happened to a major global exchange that takes security and compliance seriously. It’s a reminder that, in crypto, there’s no such thing as “good enough” security.

The anatomy of a heist 

A technical overview of the Bybit attack is key for understanding how companies can proactively strengthen their security against such attacks. Initially, a developer machine belonging to Safe, an asset management platform offering multisig Ethereum wallets used by Bybit, was compromised. This initial breach granted the attackers unauthorized access to Safe’s Amazon Web Services (AWS) environment, including its S3 storage bucket. 

The attackers then pushed a malicious JavaScript file into this bucket, which was subsequently distributed to users via access to the Safe UI. The JS code manipulated the transaction content displayed to the user during the signing process, effectively tricking them into authorizing transfers to the attackers’ wallets while believing they were confirming legitimate transactions. 

Recent: CertiK exec explains how to keep crypto safe after Bybit hack

This highlights how even highly robust security at the technical level, like multisig, can be vulnerable if not implemented correctly. They can lull users into a false sense of security that can be fatal.

Layered security

While multisignature security setups have long been considered the gold standard in digital asset security, the Bybit hack underscores the need for further analysis and transparency on the implementation of these systems, including the layers of security that exist to mitigate attacks that exploit operational security and the human layer in addition to verification of the smart contracts themselves. 

A robust security framework for safeguarding digital assets should prioritize multi-layered verification and restrict the scope of potential interactions. Such a framework demonstrably enhances protection against attacks.

A well-designed system implements a thorough verification process for all transactions. For example, a triple-check verification system involves the mobile application verifying the server’s data, the server checking the mobile application’s data, and the hardware wallet verifying the server’s data. If any of these checks fail, the transaction will not be signed. This multi-layered approach contrasts with systems that directly interface with onchain contracts, potentially lacking critical server-side checks. These checks are essential for fault tolerance, especially if the user’s interface is compromised.

A secure framework should limit the scope of possible interactions with digital asset vaults. Restricting actions to a minimal set, like sending, receiving and managing signers, reduces potential attack vectors associated with complex smart contract modifications.

Using a dedicated mobile application for sensitive operations, like transaction creation and display, adds another security layer. Mobile platforms often offer better resistance to compromise and spoofing compared to browser-based wallets or multisig interfaces. This reliance on a dedicated application enhances the overall security posture.

Transparency upgrades

To bolster transparency, businesses can leverage the capabilities of proof-of-reserve software. These can defend multisignature custody setups from UI-targeted attacks by providing an independent, self-auditable view of chain state/ownership and verifying that the correct set of keys is available to spend funds in a given address/contract (akin to a health check). 

As institutional adoption of Bitcoin (BTC) and digital assets continues, custody providers must transparently communicate such details on the security models of their systems in addition to the design decisions behind them: This is the true “gold standard” of crypto security. 

Transparency should extend to how the nature of the underlying protocols alters the attack surface of custody setups, including multisignature wallets. Bitcoin has prioritized human-verifiable transfers where signers confirm destination addresses directly rather than confirm engagement in complex smart contracts, which require additional steps/dependencies to reveal the flow of funds. 

In the case of the Bybit hack, this would enable the human signer to detect more easily that the address shown by the hardware wallet did not match the spoofed UI.

While expressive smart contracts expand the application design space, they increase the attack surface and make formal security audits more challenging. Bitcoin’s well-established multisignature standards, including a native multisig opcode, create additional security barriers against such attacks. The Bitcoin protocol has historically favored simplicity in its design, which reduces the attack surface not just at the smart contracting layer but also at the UX/human layer, including hardware wallet users. 

Increasing regulatory acceptance shows how far Bitcoin has come since its early era of widespread hacks and frauds, but Bybit shows we must never let our guard slip. Bitcoin represents financial freedom — and the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Opinion by: Vikash Singh, Principal Investor at Stillmark.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Continue Reading

Politics

Chief rabbi condemns BBC’s ‘mishandled response’ to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury – as Bob Vylan issue new statement

Published

on

By

Chief rabbi condemns BBC's 'mishandled response' to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury - as Bob Vylan issue new statement

The chief rabbi has described the BBC’s response to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury as “belated and mishandled” – as the punk-rap duo involved, Bob Vylan, said the UK government needed to talk about its “criminal inaction”.

Sir Ephraim Mirvis said “vile Jew-hatred” had been aired at the Somerset music festival and it was a “time of national shame”.

Confidence in the BBC’s “ability to treat antisemitism seriously” has been brought to a “new low”, he said in a post on X, adding that “outright incitement to violence and hatred” appeared to be acceptable if it was couched as “edgy political commentary”.

Ordinary people had not only failed to see incitement “for what it is” but had cheered it, chanted it, and celebrated it, he said. “Toxic Jew-hatred is a threat to our entire society,” he added.

Bob Vylan, posting a new statement on Instagram on Tuesday, said they were “not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people”.

Rather, they were for the “dismantling of a violent military machine” – the Israel Defence Forces.

Bob Vylan chanted “death to the IDF” at Glastonbury. As many as 95% of the IDF are thought to be Jewish.

In their statement, the group said they were a “distraction from the story” and that whatever “sanctions” they received would also be a distraction.

Their US visas have been revoked and United Talent Agency, their US representatives, have dropped them.

Bob Vylan with their MOBO award in London in November 2022. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Bob Vylan with their MOBO award in London in November 2022. Pic: Reuters

Referring to the war in Gaza, they claimed the UK government does not want them to ask “why they remain silent in the face of this atrocity”, “why they aren’t doing more to stop the killing” and “feed the starving”.

They added: “The more time they talk about Bob Vylan, the less time they spend answering for their criminal inaction.

“We are being targeted for speaking up. We are not the first, we will not be the last, and if you care for the sanctity of human life and freedom of speech, we urge you to speak up, too.”

It has emerged that Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, was at Glastonbury when the duo led chants of “Death to the IDF” which were broadcast live.

The prime minister’s spokesman, asked if the PM had confidence in Mr Davie, said Sir Keir Starmer had “confidence in the BBC”, adding: “The position of the director-general is a matter for the BBC’s board.”

Speaking in the Commons, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said “accountability” was important and it was something she had “impressed upon the BBC leadership”.

She added: “When you have one editorial failure, it’s something that must be gripped. When you have several, it becomes a problem of leadership.”

The cabinet minister said she’d called Mr Davie after Bob Vylan’s set had been broadcast to find out why it had aired, and why the feed had not been cut.

“I expect answers to these questions without delay,” she said.

Meanwhile Dame Caroline Dinenage, chair of the culture, media and sport committee, has written to Mr Davie in relation to the corporation’s Glastonbury coverage.

The committee has said the letter asks about editorial and decision-making processes and whether consideration was given to broadcasting with a delay. It also asks about staffing levels at the festival and contingency planning.

Secretary of State for Culture, Media, and Sport Lisa Nandy arrives in Downing Street, London, for a Cabinet meeting. Picture date: Tuesday May 13, 2025.
Image:
Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, has claimed there is a ‘problem of leadership’ at the BBC. File pic: PA

Avon and Somerset Police has begun a criminal investigation and is reviewing footage of both Bob Vylan and Kneecap’s performances at Glastonbury.

The force said a senior detective had been appointed – and it had been contacted by people from around the world.

“We… recognise the strength of public feeling,” it said.

During Kneecap’s set, one member suggested starting a “riot” outside his bandmate’s forthcoming court appearance, before clarifying that he meant “support”. Liam Og O hAnnaidh, also known as Mo Chara, is charged with a terror offence.

Moglai Bap and Mo Chara of Kneecap perform at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Moglai Bap and Mo Chara of Kneecap performing at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters

Bob Vylan had been due to tour the US before their visas were revoked.

US deputy secretary of state Christopher Landau said action had been taken “in light of their hateful tirade at Glastonbury, including leading the crowd in death chants”.

“Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,” he added.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

During Bob Vylan’s set, the duo performed in front of a screen that showed several messages, including one that claimed Israel’s actions in Gaza amounted to “genocide”.

The war in Gaza began after Hamas militants attacked Israel on 7 October 2023 and killed 1,200 people and took about 250 hostage.

Israel’s offensive in Gaza has led to the deaths of more than 56,500 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilians and combatants.

Read more from Sky News:
Starmer faces rebellion at key welfare cuts vote
Trump piles more pressure on central bank chief

Media watchdog Ofcom has said the BBC “clearly has questions to answer” over the live stream from Glastonbury.

A BBC spokesperson said: “The director-general was informed of the incident after the performance and at that point he was clear it should not feature in any other Glastonbury coverage.”

The broadcaster respects freedom of expression but “stands firmly against incitement to violence”, they said.

They added: “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves…

“The team were dealing with a live situation, but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Government accused of ‘stark’ contradiction over position on Gaza genocide allegations

Published

on

By

Government accused of 'stark' contradiction over position on Gaza genocide allegations

The government has won a long-running legal challenge about its decision to continue allowing the sale of spare parts for F-35 fighter jets to Israel, while suspending other arms licences over concerns about international humanitarian law in Gaza.

But a key part of its case has highlighted mixed messaging about its position on the risk of genocide in Gaza – and intensified calls for ministers to publish their own assessment on the issue.

PM braced for pivotal vote – politics latest

Lawyers acting for the government told judges “the evidence available does not support a finding of genocide” and “the government assessment was that…there was no serious risk of genocide occurring”.

Therefore, they argued, continuing to supply the F-35 components did not put the UK at risk of breaching the Genocide Convention.

This assessment has never been published or justified by ministers in parliament, despite numerous questions on the issue.

Some MPs argue its very existence contrasts with the position repeatedly expressed by ministers in parliament – that the UK is unable to give a view on allegations of genocide in Gaza, because the question is one for the international courts.

For example, just last week Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner told PMQs “it is a long-standing principle that genocide is determined by competent international courts and not by governments”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Situation in Gaza ‘utterly intolerable’

‘The UK cannot sit on our hands’

Green MP Ellie Chowns said: “The government insists only an international court can judge whether genocide is occurring in Gaza, yet have somehow also concluded there is ‘no serious risk of genocide’ in Gaza – and despite my urging, refuse to publish the risk assessments which lead to this decision.

“Full transparency on these risk assessments should not be optional; it is essential for holding the government to account and stopping further atrocity.

“While Labour tie themselves in knots contradicting each other, families are starving, hospitals lie in ruins, and children are dying.

“The UK cannot sit on our hands waiting for an international court verdict when our legal duty under the Genocide Convention compels us to prevent genocide from occurring, not merely seek justice after the fact.”

‘Why are these assessments being made?’

“This contradiction at the heart of the government’s position is stark,” said Zarah Sultana MP, an outspoken critic of Labour’s approach to the conflict in Gaza, who now sits as an independent after losing the party whip last summer.

“Ministers say it’s not for them to determine genocide, that only international courts can do so. Yet internal ‘genocide assessments’ have clearly been made and used to justify continuing arms exports to Israel.

“If they have no view, why are these assessments being made? And if they do, why refuse to share them with parliament? This Labour government, in opposition, demanded the Tories publish their assessments. Now in office, they’ve refused to do the same.”

Read more:
‘All I see is blood’
‘It felt like earthquakes’
MPs want Ukraine-style scheme for Gazans

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Routes for Palestinians ‘restricted’

Judges at the High Court ultimately ruled the case was over such a “sensitive and political issue” it should be a matter for the government, “which is democratically accountable to parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not the court”.

Dearbhla Minogue, a senior lawyer at the Global Legal Action Network, and a solicitor for Al-Haq, the Palestinian human rights group which brought the case, said: “This should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the government, but rather a restrained approach to the separation of powers.

“The government’s disgraceful assessment that there is no risk of genocide has therefore evaded scrutiny in the courts, and as far as we know it still stands.”

Palestinians inspect the damage at an UNRWA school sheltering displaced people that was hit in an Israeli air strike, in Gaza.
Pic Reuters
A Palestinian woman sits amid the damage at an UNRWA school sheltering displaced people. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Pics: Reuters

What is the government’s position?

Government lawyers argued the decision not to ban the export of F-35 parts was due to advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the whole F-35 programme and have a “profound impact on international peace and security”.

The UK supplies F-35 component parts as a member of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets.

As a customer of that programme, Israel can order from the pool of spare parts.

‘This washing of hands will no longer work’

Labour MP Richard Burgon said the ruling puts the government under pressure to clarify its position.

“This court ruling is very clear: only the government and parliament can decide if F-35 fighter jet parts – that can end up in Israel – should be sold,” he said.

“So the government can no longer pass the buck: it can stop these exports, or it can be complicit in Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

“On many issues they say it’s not for the government to decide, but it’s one for the international courts. This washing of hands will no longer work.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Dozens dead in Gaza after Israeli strikes

Israel has consistently rejected any allegations of genocide.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu branded a recent UN report on the issue biased and antisemitic.

“Instead of focusing on the crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by the Hamas terrorist organisation… the United Nations once again chooses to attack the state of Israel with false accusations,” he said in a statement.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Gaza disinformation campaign is deliberate’

The UK government has not responded to requests for comment over its contrasting messaging to parliament and the courts over allegations of genocide.

But in response to the judgement, a spokesperson said: “The court has upheld this government’s thorough and lawful decision-making on this matter.

“This shows that the UK operates one of the most robust export control regimes in the world. We will continue to keep our defence export licensing under careful and continual review.

“On day one of this Government, the foreign secretary ordered a review into Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL).

“The review concluded that there was a clear risk that UK exports for the IDF (Israel Defence Forces) in the Gaza conflict might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of IHL.

“In contrast to the last government, we took decisive action, stopping exports to the Israeli Defence Forces that might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.”

Continue Reading

Politics

US Senate passes Trump’s budget bill without provision on crypto taxes

Published

on

By

US Senate passes Trump’s budget bill without provision on crypto taxes

US Senate passes Trump’s budget bill without provision on crypto taxes

Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis had proposed that the legislation address double taxation for cryptocurrency miners and stakers.

Continue Reading

Trending