News

Foresight News reported that Ethereum core developer and Geth client developer Péter Szilágyi publicly disclosed today that he had written to the leadership of the Ethereum Foundation (EF) a year and a half ago, frankly expressing his "disappointment with the Ethereum Foundation" and pointing out serious issues within the foundation such as severe pay inequality, conflicts of interest, and concentration of power. He stated that since joining, "working at the Ethereum Foundation has always been a poor financial decision." According to him, his total compensation during his first six years at the foundation was only $625,000 (pre-tax, with no incentives), while the total market capitalization of ETH rose from 0 to $450 billions during that period. He believes that this low salary structure forces those who truly care about the protocol to seek compensation elsewhere, which in turn lays the groundwork for "the protocol being captured by interest groups." He also criticized the foundation for long underestimating employees' contributions while "over-relying on those willing to stay for idealistic reasons," and deliberately hiding salary information internally, "making opacity the norm." In his view, this structural imbalance is one of the key reasons why Ethereum has gradually deviated from its original intentions. When discussing the power structure of the ecosystem, Szilágyi said that Ethereum has formed a "small circle" around Vitalik Buterin—a handful of 5 to 10 opinion leaders and 1 to 3 venture capital firms control the most influential project investments and direction decisions in the ecosystem. "Ethereum appears decentralized on the surface, but the indirect control of Vitalik and his core circle over the ecosystem is almost absolute."

Foresight News reported, according to monitoring by BlockSec Phalcon, that the decentralized finance protocol SharwaFinance claimed to have been attacked and suspended its services. However, several hours later, some suspicious transactions occurred again, possibly exploiting the same underlying issue. The attacker first created a margin account, then conducted leveraged lending using the provided collateral, and finally executed a sandwich attack on the swap operation involving the borrowed assets. The root cause appears to be that the swap() function of the MarginTrading contract lacks bankruptcy checks. This function only verifies solvency based on the account status before executing the asset swap, leaving room for manipulation during the process. The two attackers made a total profit of approximately $146,000, with attacker 1 (0xd356...c08) earning about $61,000 through multiple attacks, and attacker 2 (0xaa24...795) earning about $85,000 through a single attack.