#rsETH攻击事件后续进展 Is the old path of DeFi no longer viable? Behind the hundred-billion-dollar withdrawals: people are seeking more security

The security risks of DeFi have long gone beyond smart contract vulnerabilities. After major hacking attacks, the most common misconception is to attribute all incidents solely to smart contract code flaws.
The event where the Drift protocol lost about $285 million precisely proves that this view is outdated. Chain analysis firm Chainalysis revealed that the attack stemmed from permission abuse, administrator pre-signature operation vulnerabilities, false collateral assets, rather than simple code statement flaws.
The market has also realized: today, many DeFi risks are hidden in governance permissions, signature mechanisms, operational structures, and other layers. This fundamental change alters the underlying trust objects users rely on.
Code audits and market-validated contracts remain important, but they can no longer cover the entire risk chain: signature nodes, cross-chain bridges, oracles, and market parameter configurations all have vulnerabilities.
When protocols span multiple blockchains, management committees, liquidity platforms, and derivatives, the attack surface expands much faster than the pace of decentralized narrative updates.
Post-mortem reviews of the Venus protocol also exposed similar issues, just with different risk forms.
Attackers used inflated asset values to borrow and extract about $14.9 million worth of assets, leaving the protocol with over $2 million in bad debt.
Although the causes differ from Drift, the conclusion is consistent: in scenarios with weak liquidity and structurally abnormal edges, leading DeFi lending platforms remain vulnerable to asset crises.
Next came the sudden collapse of KelpDAO.
According to CryptoSlate, this vulnerability directly triggered a run of about $10 billion across the entire DeFi market, forcing all rsETH-related markets to freeze.
Even if market sentiment later eased and capital outflow data improved, the signals remain clear: when users face cross-chain complexity, collateral uncertainties, and systemic contagion risks, their first choice is to withdraw funds.
This trend aligns with the 2026 security report released by security firm TRM: in 2025, most of the industry’s theft losses came from infrastructure attacks, surpassing simple smart contract vulnerabilities.
The trust crisis in DeFi is becoming increasingly difficult to contain, because the industry now needs to defend not just the code itself, but the entire complex operational system built on top of it.
On-chain finance continues to grow, but funds are flowing into safer products overall, and the narrative that "DeFi will completely collapse" is unsupported.
CryptoSlate data from April shows: USDT market cap has reached $185 billion, USDC market cap is $78 billion; total stablecoins on Tron are $86.96B, and on Solana $15.73B.
Ethereum still retains the core native DeFi capital, with market activity more about capital migration than full exit.
Funds are shifting toward lower-volatility financial products.
As of March 12, 2026, tokenized U.S. Treasury bonds have reached $10.9 billion, held by over 55k people.
Users still use blockchain for settlement and asset confirmation, but are less willing to invest assets into complex, high-risk native DeFi projects.
Market segmentation is very clear: signals of trust pressure and capital outflow include:
KelpDAO’s $292 million theft triggered about $10 billion in industry-wide withdrawals;
Drift’s permission vulnerabilities halved the locked-up amount;
Venus exposed liquidity weaknesses and frequent bad debts, revealing lending risks.
On-chain growth signals are positive:
USDT + USDC total market cap is about $263 billion;
Tokenized U.S. Treasury bonds amount to $10.93 billion, with over 55k holders;
Visa continues to promote USDC settlement and is building an institutional stablecoin ecosystem.
Capital is clearly moving toward products with clear logic, sufficient collateral, and institutional compatibility.
Visa’s 2026 stablecoin strategy report highlights:
It shows that the total stablecoin supply grew by over 50% in 2025, from $186 billion at the start of the year to $274 billion at year-end;
It also states that 2026 will be the year institutions officially adopt stablecoins, indicating the stablecoin sector is moving toward mainstream regulation.
The same applies to settlement layers: Visa disclosed that its USDC monthly settlement volume has exceeded an annualized scale of $3.5 billion.
While the digital aspect is a small part of the overall stablecoin market, its industry significance is profound: traditional compliant financial infrastructure is integrating into on-chain networks, no longer relying solely on native DeFi ecosystems.

Core industry competition: who will control the future on-chain infrastructure
CryptoSlate previously analyzed that: compliance agencies are vying for over $330 billion in on-chain funds, including about $317 billion in stablecoins and nearly $13 billion in tokenized government bonds.
These funds continue to pursue advantages like high speed, programmability, and 24/7 settlement, with market attention focused on top assets and core settlement networks rather than niche governance experiments.
Compared to the 2021 bull cycle, the gap is even more evident.
In past cycles, DeFi encompassed both infrastructure and end-user products: innovation hubs, high-yield sources, and models for future finance all concentrated here.
By 2026, the future of on-chain finance is being stripped of the chaotic risks of native DeFi and repackaged.
Tokenized funds enable round-the-clock circulation and rapid settlement, while stablecoins handle payments and treasury operations;
Institutions enjoy blockchain advantages while maintaining control over compliance, counterparty risk, and market structure.
CryptoSlate’s project shutdown report shows that in Q1 2026, over 80 crypto projects have officially shut down or entered liquidation.
While not limited to DeFi, this indicates that: capital’s patience for projects that cannot generate long-term value, stable returns, or real-world applications has run out.
Crypto spot ETFs are also part of this trend.
Regulatory-compliant products continue to attract market funds and attention, with users and institutions preferring infrastructure that combines blockchain benefits with lower trust risks than native DeFi.
This also preserves native DeFi’s niche: open composability and permissionless innovation still have value, serving as laboratories for financial primitives—before new models are absorbed and popularized by compliant products, DeFi leads the exploration and trial-and-error.
The current core industry conflict remains trust erosion.
Native open-source DeFi is losing narrative dominance; if it cannot quickly rebuild trust, optimize operational structures, and demonstrate the irreplaceability of its complex designs, it will gradually lose its position as the on-chain financial gateway.
The industry’s key contest is now clear: who will take on the next wave of on-chain demand?
Currently, safer and more compliant on-chain packaged products are gaining the upper hand.