令牌崩潰，盜用和協議危險：跨協議崩潰

整個協議都面臨指控，指控挪用了2300萬美元的DAO資金，引發了令牌崩潰並引起了對協議治理的擔憂。

The crypto world is buzzing about the latest drama: Across Protocol, a cross-chain bridge, is facing accusations of some seriously shady behavior. We're talking token crash, misappropriation, and questions swirling around their whole protocol. Let's dive in.

加密世界對最新戲劇的嗡嗡作響：跨鏈橋跨協議正面臨著一些嚴重的陰暗行為的指控。我們正在談論代幣崩潰，盜用和圍繞其整個協議旋轉的問題。讓我們潛水。

Across Protocol Under Fire: A $23 Million Misappropriation?

在《縱火範圍》中，涉及2300萬美元的盜用？

The core of the issue? Allegations that the Across Protocol team siphoned off approximately $23 million from their Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) treasury. The claim, made public by Ogle on June 27th, centers on accusations that the team manipulated governance votes to transfer funds to Risk Labs, a private company linked to the same team behind Across Protocol.

問題的核心？指控跨協議團隊從其分散的自治組織（DAO）財政部撤銷了約2300萬美元。該索賠於6月27日由Ogle公開，以指控為中心，該指控是該團隊操縱治理投票將資金轉移到風險實驗室的指控，這是一家私人公司，該公司與同一團隊跨越協議有關。

Ogle's analysis suggests the co-founders and insiders allegedly bypassed the DAO's democratic process to extract 150 million ACX tokens, valued at $23 million, under the guise of “strategic investment” and “retroactive funding.” Think of it as a secret heist, but instead of masks and crowbars, it's all done with blockchain and governance proposals.

Ogle的分析表明，據稱聯合創始人和內部人士以“戰略投資”和“追溯資金”為幌子，繞過了DAO的民主進程，以提​​取1.5億ACX代幣，價值2300萬美元。將其視為一個秘密的搶劫案，但不是面具和撬棍，而是用區塊鍊和治理建議完成的。

Secret Wallets and Coordinated Voting: The Nitty-Gritty

秘密錢包和協調的投票：挑剔

The controversy revolves around two governance proposals. One proposal in October 2023 requested 100 million ACX tokens for Risk Labs, presented as a strategic move. However, blockchain sleuthing allegedly revealed coordinated insider voting. Kevin Chan, publicly submitting the proposal, supposedly cast a massive “yes” vote from a separate wallet linked to him. Other team members allegedly used multiple secret wallets to push the proposals through. A second proposal for “retroactive funding” saw similar voting patterns.

爭議圍繞兩個治理提案。 2023年10月，一項提案要求有1億個ACX令牌對風險實驗室，這是戰略性舉措。但是，據稱，區塊鏈偵查揭示了協調的內幕投票。凱文·陳（Kevin Chan）公開提交提案，據說從與他相關的單獨錢包中投票了。據稱，其他團隊成員使用多個秘密錢包來推動提案。關於“追溯資金”的第二個提案看到了類似的投票模式。

Denials and Damage Control: What's the Protocol Saying?

拒絕和損害控制：協議在說什麼？

Hart Lambur, Across Protocol CEO, has vehemently denied any wrongdoing, calling the allegations “categorically untrue.” He insists the team has not “extracted” value from the DAO. Despite these claims, the accusations have resonated throughout the crypto community, with some figures thanking Ogle for exposing potential issues with DAO governance.

跨協議首席執行官的哈特·蘭伯爾（Hart Lambur）強烈否認任何不當行為，稱這些指控“絕對不正確”。他堅持說，團隊沒有從DAO中“提取”價值。儘管有這些主張，但這些指控在整個加密貨幣社區中引起了共鳴，一些數字感謝Ogle揭露了DAO治理的潛在問題。

Market Impact: The ACX Token Takes a Hit

市場影響：ACX令牌受到了打擊

Unsurprisingly, the allegations have taken a toll on ACX token holders. The token plummeted on the news, losing a significant chunk of its value. It's a harsh reminder that trust is paramount in the decentralized world, and any hint of impropriety can send prices tumbling.

毫不奇怪，這些指控對ACX代幣持有人造成了損失。象徵性的消息暴跌，失去了其價值的很大一部分。這是一個苛刻的提醒，即信任在分散世界中至關重要，任何不當行為的暗示都可以使價格下跌。

Is This a New Trend?

這是一個新趨勢嗎？

Sadly, this situation mirrors other recent incidents. The OM token of the MANTRA blockchain project experienced a similar crash following allegations of insider misconduct. It begs the question: Is this a growing trend? Are DAOs as secure and transparent as we believe, or are they vulnerable to manipulation from within?

可悲的是，這種情況反映了其他最近的事件。在指控內幕不當行為的指控之後，咒語區塊鏈項目的OM令牌發生了類似的崩潰。它引出了一個問題：這是一個增長的趨勢嗎？ Daos是否像我們相信的那樣安全和透明，還是容易受到內部操縱的影響？

My Two Sats

我的兩個坐著

While Hart Lambur has refuted the allegations of the token crash, misappropriation, and protocol issues, the on-chain evidence provided by Ogle suggests that a deeper investigation may be necessary to resolve the situation. As blockchain technology advances, the ability to track suspicious transactions becomes increasingly easy to detect and harder to cover up. This is not to say that Hart Lambur or his team are guilty of anything, but to provide a clear record, a third-party audit may be necessary.

儘管哈特·蘭伯爾（Hart Lambur）駁斥了令牌崩潰，盜用和協議問題的指控，但Ogle提供的鏈上證據表明，解決情況可能需要進行更深入的調查。隨著區塊鏈技術的進步，追踪可疑交易的能力變得越來越容易被檢測到更難掩蓋。這並不是說哈特·蘭伯爾（Hart Lambur）或他的團隊對任何事情有罪，而是要提供明確的記錄，可能需要進行第三方審核。

The Takeaway

外賣

The Across Protocol situation serves as a cautionary tale. It highlights the importance of transparency, accountability, and robust governance within DAOs. It also underscores the potential risks associated with investing in projects where trust is compromised. The ACX token crash is a painful lesson for investors, and a stark reminder that even in the decentralized world, human nature can throw a wrench in the works.

跨協議情況是一個警示性的故事。它突出了道斯內部透明，問責制和穩健治理的重要性。它還強調了與在信任受到損害的項目中的投資相關的潛在風險。對於投資者而言，ACX令牌崩潰是一個痛苦的教訓，並提醒人們，即使在分散的世界中，人性也可以在工程中扔扳手。

So, what's the moral of the story? Stay vigilant, do your research, and remember: in the wild west of crypto, sometimes the cowboys are the ones you need to watch out for. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to check my own token holdings... just in case!

那麼，這個故事的寓意是什麼？保持警惕，進行研究，並記住：在加密貨幣的野外，有時牛仔是您需要注意的牛仔。現在，如果您能原諒我，我要去檢查自己的令牌控股……以防萬一！