Crypto & Web3·May 21, 2026

Why DeFi Keeps Losing Millions to Exploits

In brief DeFi protocols have lost over $1 billion in the first five months of 2026, with April alone bleeding more than $600 million across Drift, Kelp DAO, and a dozen smaller hits. North Korea-linked actors accounted for 76% of global cry

Decrypt6 min readVerified
Why DeFi Keeps Losing Millions to Exploits
Image · Decrypt
The gist
5-point summary · 1 min

In brief DeFi protocols have lost over $1 billion in the first five months of 2026, with April alone bleeding more than $600 million across Drift, Kelp DAO, and a dozen smaller hits. North Korea-linked actors accounted for 76% of global cry

  • In brief DeFi protocols have lost over $1 billion in the first five months of 2026, with April alone bleeding more than $600 million across Drift, Kelp DAO, and a dozen smaller hits.
  • North Korea-linked actors accounted for 76% of global crypto hack losses through April 2026, up from 64% in 2025 and under 10% in 2020, per TRM Labs.
  • AI is lowering the bar for exploit discovery, experts say, with older and unverified smart contracts increasingly targeted by automated reconnaissance.
  • We’re sharing our completed post-mortem on the April 18th incident, prepared with @Mandiant and @CrowdStrike.
  • We are publishing both an executive summary and the full report at the link below.
$1 billion$600 million$840 million$292 million$285 million$10 million
In this article

In brief DeFi protocols have lost over $1 billion in the first five months of 2026, with April alone bleeding more than $600 million across Drift, Kelp DAO, and a dozen smaller hits. North Korea-linked actors accounted for 76% of global crypto hack losses through April 2026, up from 64% in 2025 and under 10% in 2020, per TRM Labs. AI is lowering the bar for exploit discovery, experts say, with older and unverified smart contracts increasingly targeted by automated reconnaissance. It’s been one of the worst years on record for DeFi hacks, and we’re barely halfway through.In the first five months of 2026, more than $840 million was lost to DeFi hacks—with April alone accounting for more than $600 million stolen, led by two of the year’s biggest attacks: the $292 million KelpDAO exploit and the $285 million Drift Protocol breach.The losses have continued into May, with THORChain halting trading after security researchers flagged a suspected cross-chain exploit affecting more than $10 million.TrustedVolumes, Echo Protocol, Step Finance, Truebit, Resolv Labs, Volo Protocol, Rhea Finance, Verus-Ethereum bridge, and many others round out a casualty list that reads like a stress test of every trust assumption DeFi relies on, according to DeFiLlama data.Experts Decrypt spoke to broadly agree on the diagnosis that recent DeFi hacks are exposing structural weaknesses across bridges and admin systems, while advances in AI may be helping attackers find vulnerabilities faster.Natalie Newson, senior blockchain investigator at Web3 security platform CertiK, told Decrypt that while April was unusually severe for crypto exploits, the broader trend remains more stable and below the peak number of incidents seen in 2023.“April 2026 was a bad month for crypto exploits; there were only three days without an exploit in which at least $10,000 was taken,” she said.“However, when we take a look at the wider picture, the number of incidents (excluding phishing) has arguably been fairly consistent and still lower than a peak in 2023,” Newson noted, adding how April’s severity was driven by 14 exploits exceeding $1 million in losses, second only to September 2025’s 16.The North Korea factorAri Redbord, Global Head of Policy and Government Affairs at TRM Labs, told Decrypt the surge traces back to a single state actor that has gone from marginal player to defining threat in five years.“The dominant driver is North Korea, and that campaign is getting sharper, not broader,” Redbord said, noting that North Korea-linked actors accounted for 76% of global crypto hack losses in the first four months of 2026, up from 64% in 2025 and less than 10% in 2020."North Korea is using not only technology to attack the space, but also sophisticated and well-planned social engineering," he said.The year’s largest DeFi hack so far hit KelpDAO on April 18, when attackers drained about 116,500 rsETH, worth roughly $292 million, from a cross-chain bridge.LayerZero, whose messaging infrastructure underpinned the bridge, said in the latest postmortem report that the attack began on March 6, when a developer was socially engineered, and session keys were harvested. We’re sharing our completed post-mortem on the April 18th incident, prepared with @Mandiant and @CrowdStrike. We are publishing both an executive summary and the full report at the link below. Over the past four weeks, we’ve worked with hundreds of partners to help them… pic.twitter.com/yVZdqjLTeT — LayerZero (@LayerZero_Core) May 20, 2026The cross-chain messaging protocol said the attack was attributed by Mandiant, CrowdStrike, and independent researchers to DPRK threat actor TraderTraitor, also known as UNC4899.The structural reason DeFi keeps absorbing the hits, Redbord added, comes down to where the money sits and how it moves."DeFi's cross-chain complexity makes it a target-rich environment—bridges consistently produce the largest single-incident losses, and the failure modes repeat with striking consistency because the core problem is architectural,” he noted.Recurring patternsRaz Niv, Co-Founder and CTO at onchain security platform Blockaid, told Decrypt that three technical patterns keep showing up across the year's biggest incidents: privileged access control failures, malicious proxy upgrades where attackers swap implementation contracts for backdoored versions, and cross-chain message verification gaps.On privileged access, Niv said the firm monitors for "anomalous 'Role Granted' events and unauthorized privilege escalation," with incidents like the Echo Protocol exploit tracing back to compromised or misconfigured admin keys."Attackers either social engineer their way to private keys or exploit poorly designed multisig thresholds,” he added.He pointed to failures involving privileged access controls, malicious proxy upgrades and cross-chain verification systems, saying that recent attacks are exposing deeper weaknesses in the assumptions connecting increasingly complex infrastructure.“The common thread isn't complexity per se,” Niv said. “It's that each layer of abstraction (proxies, admin roles, cross-chain messaging) introduces trust assumptions that attackers methodically probe.”AI influenceNiv said AI is increasingly transforming exploit discovery, though he cautioned that its impact is often misunderstood.Current models are becoming increasingly effective at identifying known vulnerabilities at scale and are “automating what skilled auditors do,” he said, while warning that “the real concern isn't AI replacing human attackers” but AI “amplifying attackers” by handling reconnaissance and freeing them to focus on more sophisticated techniques.“The good news is defenders can use the same tools. AI-assisted monitoring and simulation is becoming essential for security teams trying to keep pace,” Niv added.In the case of the surge in DeFi hacks, Newson pointed to a similar trend, saying “one factor that is likely a contributor, though not the sole factor, is the advances in AI.”She added that CertiK has seen a rise in older and unverified contracts being exploited, making “the logical assumption that AI is helping find vulnerabilities.”Similarly, Redbord said “bad actors are deploying AI at scale” across reconnaissance, social engineering, and exploit design, adding the sophistication seen in attacks like on Drift appears “consistent with AI-assisted workflows.”TRM analysts believe North Korean operators are increasingly incorporating AI tools into their operations, with him saying, “the answer is to deploy AI on defense with the same aggression adversaries are deploying it on offense.Above the codeRedbord said DeFi hacks are “a solvable problem,” but said that the industry needs to be more honest about where failures are actually occurring.He noted that “audits protect against code bugs” but not against sophisticated social engineering campaigns like Drift, where North Korean proxies reportedly spent months cultivating access before the breach.“The model that works is real-time public-private coordination,” the expert added.Newson said 2026 may represent “an evolutionary turning point,” saying the industry is learning that cybersecurity is a “full-stack problem” spanning “AI, the DPRK, or infrastructure and personnel.”“It doesn't matter how perfect your math is on-chain if your human processes off-chain are vulnerable,” she said, noting the industry is increasingly shifting toward “practical, structural solutions” to address infrastructure and social-engineering risks.Confidence hitThe damage to confidence in the DeFi space is harder to quantify but easy to observe.The Kelp DAO exploit triggered a $6.2 billion wave of withdrawals from Aave alone, before a relief effort led by Aave CEO Stani Kulechov, dubbed “DeFi United,” raised 132,650 ETH worth roughly $303 million to backstop the bad debt.The coordinated response shows the industry can mobilize. It also shows how much capital it takes to paper over a single bridge exploit.Newson said the fallout depends entirely on who's affected."Seasoned industry veterans may look at the last six weeks as par for the course—simply the next evolutionary norm and a harsh experience to be learned from," she said.She noted the impact of repeated exploits looks very different for newer market participants, warning that for users who lose significant funds, the fallout isn't a “learning experience” but raises “existential questions” about crypto’s long-term “viability and safety,” with technical fixes often arriving too late to undo the damage.Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.

Integrity note  ·  Xela does not rewrite or paraphrase article content. The excerpt above is the source publication's own words, sanitized for display. For the full piece — including any quotes, charts, or images — read it at Decrypt. Xela's rewritten version is off for this story, so there's no editorial angle attached — you're getting the source's reporting unfiltered. When the rewrite is on, we add a What this means block underneath with the operator/trader takeaway.

What people are saying

Discussion

Hot takes

0/280

Loading takes…

Comments

Discussion · 0

Sign in to comment, like, and save articles.

Sign in

Loading comments…

Keep readingCrypto & Web3 desk
See all in Crypto
Bitcoin analysis shows what bulls need to do next to end this bearish 2026
·

Bitcoin analysis shows what bulls need to do next to end this bearish 2026

Bitcoin stabilizes near $63,000, but reclaiming $64,000 is the real test Bitcoin is stabilizing near $63,100 after buyers defended the lower part of its recent range. That is constructive, but it is not yet a confirmed recovery. BTC must first overcome resistance near $63,175-$63,270, while reclaiming and holding $64,000-$64,095 remains the more important test. Key takeaways for Bitcoin traders and investors Current position: BTC is holding above the previous month’s lower value boundary near $62,380. Immediate resistance: Buyers need to clear $63,130-$63,175, followed by $63,247-$63,270. Main recovery test: A sustained reclaim of $64,000-$64,095 would carry much more weight than a temporary bounce near $63,000. Major support: The broader $62,380-$62,535 region remains the most important defended zone. Bullish confirmation: Repeated closes, consolidation or a successful retest above $64,095 would show that Bitcoin is beginning to establish higher accepted value. Data note: The latest daily, four-hour and one-hour candles were incomplete when this analysis was prepared. Exchange-specific Bitcoin prices may also differ slightly. I'm also closely monitoring the digital asset space after , putting immediate pressure on lower order-flow shelves as bulls fight to defend structural trendlines. Regulatory headwinds also resurfaced as the , injecting fresh institutional hesitation into active trading books. Meanwhile, broader risk sentiment showed divergence across asset classes as , underscoring rotational breadth away from mega-cap tech into small-cap momentum. Macro headwinds and geopolitical posturing remain front and center following headline chatter that , all while monetary policy uncertainty lingers after amidst baseline model variances. Why Bitcoin’s stabilization is constructive but incomplete Bitcoin recently fell to approximately $62,535, where the decline attracted meaningful buying. Price subsequently recovered toward $63,100, strengthening the case that buyers are willing to defend the lower part of the previous month’s trading range. What stands out to me, however, is how little upward progress followed that buying. Several periods showed positive buying pressure, but BTC remained concentrated around $63,050 and repeatedly struggled to extend beyond $63,150-$63,175. In simple terms, buyers have shown that they can slow the decline, but they have not yet shown that they can move Bitcoin into a clearly higher trading range. This is the difference between stabilization and recovery: Stabilization means sellers are no longer pushing price lower with the same ease. Recovery means buyers are lifting price, holding above resistance and shifting the market’s most active trading area higher. Bitcoin has shown the first condition. The second still needs confirmation. Why $62,380 and $64,095 matter The previous month’s value area provides a useful map of where most Bitcoin trading took place: Value Area Low near $62,380: The lower boundary of the previous month’s heavily traded range. Point of Control near $64,095: The price that attracted the most trading activity during the month. Value Area High near $65,050: The upper boundary of the previous month’s accepted range. BTC is currently about $720 above the monthly Value Area Low, but almost $1,000 below the monthly Point of Control. Holding above $62,380 tells us that demand inside the previous month’s range has not completely failed. Remaining below $64,095 tells us that buyers have not regained control of the broader value structure. This is also why $64,095 may be more important than $64,000 itself. The round number attracts attention, but $64,095 represents the previous month’s busiest price area. A brief move above $64,000 could still become another failed breakout. Holding above $64,095 would provide stronger evidence that the market is accepting higher prices again. As discussed in our previous analysis, Bitcoin’s created technical repair work for buyers. That repair is not complete simply because BTC has bounced from $62,535. Bitcoin support and resistance levels to watch What would strengthen the bullish Bitcoin scenario? Swing traders should have 3 key price levels: The Value Area Low (VAL), Point of Control (POC) and Value Area High (VAH) of the previous month. Together, these levels map the previous month’s main area of accepted trading: the VAL marks its lower boundary, the VAH its upper boundary, and the POC the price where the most volume traded. Traders watch them because holding inside the area suggests continued acceptance, while a sustained break outside it may signal that the market is searching for a new value zone. The first constructive step would be sustained trade above $63,175. Buyers would then need to clear and hold above $63,247-$63,270. That would improve the probability of a move toward $63,350 and, eventually, the much larger $64,000-$64,095 test. A more convincing recovery would include: Bitcoin reclaiming $64,000. Price moving above the monthly point of control near $64,095. A pullback successfully defending the reclaimed area. Trading activity beginning to concentrate above $64,095 rather than immediately slipping back below it. If that sequence develops, approximately $65,050 becomes the next major value-area objective. What this means: Acceptance is more than touching a level. It means price spends time above it, survives pullbacks and begins treating the higher area as support. What would weaken the stabilization attempt? Failure to hold $62,920-$62,800 would weaken the current short-term base and increase the probability of another test of $62,535. The more serious bearish development would be sustained trade below $62,380. That would place BTC outside the previous month’s accepted value area and suggest that the market may need to search for demand at lower prices. Traders should still distinguish between a brief move below $62,380 and genuine acceptance beneath it. Crypto markets can produce fast stop-runs through visible support before reversing. Repeated closes or continued trading below the level would carry more bearish significance than a momentary sweep. What Bitcoin traders may consider watching Different traders may use these levels in different ways, at their own discretion: Short-term breakout confirmation: Watch whether BTC can break above $63,175 and successfully retest it, with $63,247-$63,270 providing the next validation area. Support-zone reaction: If BTC returns to $62,380-$62,535, watch whether buyers defend it again or whether selling begins to hold below the zone. Broader recovery confirmation: Treat $64,000-$64,095 as the decisive recovery test instead of assuming that every bounce from $63,000 marks a durable bottom. Because Bitcoin trades continuously, weekend conditions can sometimes involve thinner liquidity and less reliable breakouts. Confirmation through time, repeated closes or a successful retest may therefore be more useful than reacting to the first price spike. What should Bitcoin traders watch next? Bitcoin has defended the lower part of the previous month’s value area, but the rebound still needs to prove itself. The immediate challenge is to move beyond $63,175 and $63,270. The much larger test remains $64,000-$64,095. A successful reclaim would indicate that Bitcoin is returning toward the center of the previous month’s accepted value rather than merely bouncing from support. Until that happens, Bitcoin may be stabilizing, but it is not yet showing a fully confirmed bullish recovery. This analysis presents conditional market scenarios and opinions (not promises) at investingLive.com, not a guarantee of future performance. Traders should consider volatility, position size and their own risk limits before acting. This article was written by Itai Levitan at investinglive.com.

ForexliveSingle source
Newsletter

Track crypto & web3 every morning.

Daily digest tuned to this beat. The 5 stories most worth your time. Unsubscribe anytime.