3時間前
ZachXBT: Circle Let Over $230M in Stolen USDC Cross Its Bridge Unfrozen
Circle, issuer of the world's second-largest stablecoin USDC, is facing criticism after blockchain investigator ZachXBT alleged the firm failed to act as more than $230 million in stolen USDC moved through its own cross-chain bridge.
The funds trace back to the Drift Protocol exploit on April 1, a theft estimated at $280 million to $285 million, now among the largest DeFi hacks on record. ZachXBT said the attacker moved USDC from Solana to Ethereum via Circle's Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP), splitting the transfers across more than 100 transactions over roughly six hours.
Drift exploit: admin access, not a smart-contract bug
ZachXBT's write-up describes an operational-layer compromise rather than a typical smart-contract vulnerability. The attacker allegedly gained administrative permissions and used pre-signed transactions enabled by durable nonces to line up withdrawals and execute them rapidly. The exploit unfolded in about 12 minutes.
Following the incident, the DRIFT token collapsed, falling about 98% from its $2.65 all-time high and trading around $0.041 to $0.06 afterward.
Why Circle's response is the focus
USDC differs from decentralized stablecoins in a critical way: Circle can freeze USDC at the wallet level. The company has previously frozen about $110 million in USDC across wallets, typically tied to law enforcement requests or sanctions compliance.
ZachXBT argues that the Drift exploit was public while the funds were still moving, and that the bridging activity occurred during regular business hours. In that window, he says Circle had time to flag and freeze the stolen USDC as it passed through CCTP. Instead, more than $230 million crossed chains without interruption.
The allegation is drawing added scrutiny because, according to observers, Circle had blacklisted other wallets only days earlier under circumstances some in the industry viewed as questionable—suggesting the capability to move quickly when it chooses.
Broader implications for USDC and DeFi
The incident is resonating beyond Drift because of USDC's scale. USDC processed $9.6 trillion in on-chain volume in February 2025 alone and is widely used across DeFi lending, trading, and liquidity infrastructure.
Critics argue the episode highlights a long-running tension around centralized stablecoins: the freeze function is marketed as a safety feature, but it also concentrates discretion in a single issuer. If freezes occur for compliance reasons but not during a high-profile theft, skeptics say the mechanism can look more like selective enforcement than user protection.
For institutional participants, the episode may challenge assumptions that centralized stablecoin issuers act as an effective backstop during crises. Risk frameworks that treated USDC as quasi-insured could face renewed scrutiny.
Circle has not publicly detailed why it did not intervene. Possible explanations include internal requirements for specific law enforcement requests before action is taken, even in apparent theft cases. Still, the optics have fueled debate over what the compliance apparatus is designed to accomplish, a conversation likely to surface in ongoing stablecoin policy discussions in the U.S. and abroad.
The event could also sharpen interest in alternative stablecoin models, including decentralized options such as DAI and newer collateralized designs, as protocols reassess issuer risk.
For Drift Protocol, the outlook remains difficult. A 98% token drawdown undermines treasury value, compensation capacity, and the ability to retain users and developers, with recoveries from exploits of this magnitude historically rare.
Bottom line
The Drift Protocol theft was already a landmark DeFi exploit. The allegation that Circle had a multi-hour window to freeze over $230 million in stolen USDC moving through CCTP—and did not—has turned it into a broader test of what centralized stablecoin control is meant to deliver in a crisis.