NEAR Intents paused services after an exploit caused by an Omni deposit and withdrawal bug resulted in preliminary losses of roughly $3.8M.
[1]← Week of Sep 28Sep 28 – Oct 4 UTC Every claim links to the posts behind it01 02 03 04 05 06 8 posts on X 2 weeks
Narrative / Rank 07 / Week of Sep 28 – Oct 4 / Back after a break
NEAR Intents Halts After $3.8M Exploit as Bitget Recovery Sparks Permissioned Chain Debate
Peak / day24tracked accounts
Peak dayMonSep 28 · busiest day in the panel
Rest of X / peak day145distinct accounts outside the panel
Cited claims6source links retained
Market · $NEAR+11.7%7-day price · rank #21
Attention
Who was talking, day by day
Tracked paneldistinct tracked accounts / day
Rest of Xdistinct other accounts / day
What happened
NEAR Intents paused operations following a reported $3.8M exploit caused by a smart contract bug in its Omni deposit and withdrawal infrastructure, with funds allegedly routed through Zcash. The protocol's role in helping Bitget recover stolen assets led critics to claim the ecosystem is permissioned, prompting defenders to argue that intent applications have distinct safety layers from the decentralized base chain. Traders largely dismissed the incident as temporary FUD and looked to buy market dips.
Why it matters
The incident highlights a core industry friction: whether intervening to mitigate exploits compromises a network's decentralization credentials. Despite the security breach and decentralization debate, market demand remained resilient amid broader momentum from the newly launched US spot NEAR ETF.
Observed reaction
Split with resilient optimism. Critics seized on the hack and fund recovery to question NEAR's decentralization, while ecosystem defenders posted architectural clarifications and traders viewed the exploit as an entry dip.
Spread
Where it started and who carried it
- First seen
- Sep 28, 02:23 UTC by @cryptogorilla
- Accounts
- 68 tracked · 63 elsewhere on X
- Communities
- general ct (22), memecoins solana (15), eth defi (9), ai crypto (9)
- Key accounts
- @cryptorover, @ashcrypto, @ilblackdragon, @haenko21, @zubic_eth
Explainability
Evidence register
Stolen funds associated with the Bitget security incident were reportedly transferred via Zcash.
[1]NEAR aided Bitget in recovering stolen funds, prompting claims from critics that NEAR is permissioned.
[1]Defenders argued that the NEAR blockchain remains decentralized while intent and payment protocols use separate safety layers.
[1]Traders brushed off the NEAR exploit as FUD and actively sought dip-buying entries.
[1][2]The first US spot NEAR ETF by Bitwise launched and reportedly registered over $50M in inflows across two days.
[1][2]Angles
- App vs. Base Layer: Breaking down the technical boundary between intent protocols and core L1 consensus when exploits happen.
- The Resilience Playbook: How NEAR's market momentum absorbed a $3.8M security headline without breaking market structure.
- Cross-chain Security: Examining risks in Omni deposit and withdrawal infrastructure across multi-chain ecosystems.
In the playbook for Thu, Oct 15
Formats in use
- Quote tweets of project incident reports
- Defensive educational threads distinguishing L1s from intent layers
- Chart screenshots with dip-buying commentary
Risks
- The full scope and fund routing of the Bitget and NEAR Intents exploit remain unverified preliminary reports.
- Avoid taking sides in contentious decentralization debates that accuse protocols of being centralized or permissioned.
- Ensure coverage excludes financial advice or validation of speculative ecosystem tokens.
Observed content
Most-engaged posts
Be Jadoodoo -> her father’s cancer forced her to pursue trading -> entered crypto in 2021 -> lost savings during a sudden Ripple crash -> rebuilt her account before BTC crash erased it again -> studied RSI and Elliott Wave between trades -> turned roughly $5k into nearly $70k ->Open on X →
yo Solana degens, $NEAR is the Solana of this cycle. bring your degen stuff over. remember Solana at $8 after FTX? "Solana is dead" was the meme, and the people who stayed got the whole run. NEAR had its own version of that: years as the overlooked L1. now the attention is backOpen on X →
$NEAR is paying too much for security. The new House of Stake discussion points in the right direction: gradually cut issuance from 2.5% to 1.6% over two years, then explore a path toward fixed supply. The formal proposal is expected to go to a vote next week. I support it. WhOpen on X →
$NEAR ✍🏻 Beautiful rejection at $5.15, and now it’s slowly coming down toward my levels. As I said, it will be hard to catch this dip around $4.00–$4.25, but I’ll see how price reacts near those levels and slowly start building my swing long. My next target is $8–$11 in q4/q1Open on X →
$NEAR is now ready for another run, likely heading to $6 🚀 Buy everything you can get your hands on NEAR Some Potential bags to watch: $RHEA $NINU $DIARHEA $NOMO $NEARLY $HOOT PS: NFA https://t.co/VoaFJqI7ojOpen on X →
$NEAR ✍🏻 Price held the 4.50–4.60 zone pretty well and so far we’re seeing a good bounce. It’ll be interesting to see how price reacts around 5.00–5.05. If we reclaim it, I’ll look for a long. Otherwise patiently waiting for my 4.00–4.25 zone. ⏳️ But Phase 2 of NEAR = 8–11🔮Open on X →
Someone said @mert is always on the right side of the pump and I kinda agreed with them, because tell me how can someone be fully in when Sol had their crash and below $8 , stand strong with Zcaah when everyone almost lost hope in them and binance delist take it below $20, $NEAROpen on X →
$NEAR helped Bitget recover funds from a hack, and now people are calling NEAR permissioned. Seems like you're mixing up two different things: the NEAR intents protocol and the NEAR blockchain. You guys have it backwards; the blockchain is decentralized, while the payment andOpen on X →
History