Hello everyone!

I was one of the liquidity providers. My losses from the hack amount to tens of thousands. I ask you to read further and, if possible, draw conclusions based on the facts.

Before the incident, the majority of TVL in the pools (ETHDOT, ARBDOT, BASEDOT) was concentrated across 5-6 accounts. According to DeBank, the total value of assets on some addresses exceeded $1 million, with account creation dates going back a long time (1.5–2 years). That is, the funds in the pools were placed not by newcomers, but by people who understand and can take responsibility for the actual risks in DeFi.

Over the last 2–3 months, the pools did not show high yield. It was around 22–23%. But what is important is that the pools were perceived as a very reliable tool for several reasons:

*The Polkadot DeFi Singularity campaign. Here, “Polkadot” is a brand. The official Polkadot channel on X confirmed the adoption of this program.

*On the official website https://wiki.polkadot.com/learn/learn-hyperbridge/, there is a description of HyperBridge. Here are just some of the definitions:

Hyperbridge (short for hyper-scalable bridge) is innovated as a cross-chain solution built as an interoperability coprocessor. Hyperbridge is crafted to scale cryptographically secure, consensus, and state-proof-based interoperability across all blockchains.
…..
This capability enables the distribution of the validation workload for consensus, state proofs, and state transition re-execution across various designated cores. Hence, Polkadot is utilized by Hyperbridge as a verifiable computation layer to provide the “Full Node Security” in cross-chain bridges.
…..
The Barretenberg backend: Within the realm of Hyperbridge, Barretenberg functions as a powerhouse engine, adeptly managing intricate mathematical computations. As the backend infrastructure, it guarantees the swift, secure, and reliable execution of all cryptographic operations within the Hyperbridge ecosystem.
…..
The ultimate goal is to ensure a widespread and verifiable agreement among network participants, enhancing the security and reliability of the distributed ledger.

*From the description of the Polkadot DeFi Singularity program, it follows that one of the main tasks was to attract liquidity to the ecosystem, improve brand recognition, and increase loyalty. To operate the liquidity pools, only one bridge option was proposed — HyperBridge, which was also mentioned many times on the official X account and was presented by the ecosystem as secure.

I (we) realize that investing (working with pools) carries risks. But in this particular case, based on the principle of reasonableness and fairness, it can be assumed that the ecosystem itself also bears responsibility for this incident.

From the program description: “Polkadot will significantly increase the utility, recognition, and adoption of DOT as a key asset in the Web3 ecosystem.” Link to the Google Docs file in https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1439

Technology without users is dead. There needs to be more “friendliness”, to be more open and fair to its users, to show loyalty.
Resolving incidents like this is precisely the best advertisement — with media coverage.
The HyperBridge hack can now be turned to the benefit of the Polkadot ecosystem
Not a “sea of corpses” for the sake of creating perfect technology, where users are just consumables, and the HyperBridge problem is just an unfortunate misunderstanding.

I myself am a holder of the DOT token; I buy more on dips. It is hard to watch it “move south”.

I ask community members, delegates, and leaders to pay attention to this topic. If possible, take part in the discussion to reach a compromise solution that would allow the project not to lose its investment and reputational appeal, but at the same time not to bear losses for someone else’s risks.