Crypto lending, risk first
The archive
22 articles · Page 3 of 4
A $250,000 minimum, up to 75% initial advance, margin call at 85% and liquidation at 90%. Every threshold is published in the launch release. What the release does not publish is the price source that decides when they are crossed.
The $8.7m the trackers reported matches the stablecoins the post-mortem traces off Base. What a forensic report published on the protocol's forum a day later adds is a different number: $9.13m of borrower obligations still outstanding. The mechanism is not a vote and not a broken contract, but a donation to a market contract and a price feed that believed it.
A revolving line against BTC, ETH and staked SOL at 50% loan-to-value and an advertised 8.99% variable APR. The pitch rests on collateral the firm says it does not lend on — a claim the borrower cannot check, and the launch coverage never describes the margin call.
An attacker bought majority control of a thinly held governance token, passed proposals against Term Finance's strategy vaults and moved roughly $8.5 million out. The contracts executed exactly as written.
The app is a familiar exchange account. The loan underneath it is a smart-contract position that a price feed can close without asking. Assessed on the gap between those two facts.
Coinbase, Uniswap and Crypto.com each ship a lending or borrowing button with their own branding on it. The documented integrations keep pointing at one shared backend, and that is a risk question.
