The dApp frontend was hacked, leading to user theft. Is there any solution?
In recent days, users accessed the Zerobase frontend (which has been tampered with by hackers) through the Binance wallet, and after authorization, funds were stolen, which has been a major topic of discussion.
From the user's perspective, in a normal operational process, it is almost impossible to verify whether the contract is correct every time.
Since the problem genuinely exists and is hard to avoid, how should it be resolved?
This afternoon, a super teacher said: the wallet side should quickly implement direct integration with the contract to avoid users relying on the frontend for contract operations.
By reducing the steps in complex processes, to ensure a safe solution is practically feasible, some wallets and third-party tools are already trying this approach.
👇 For example, several instances added by group friends:
1️⃣ DeBank can directly call the contract's Withdraw, even if the protocol frontend has been taken down.
2️⃣ Rabbit wallet supports direct Withdraw of contracts from certain protocols.
3️⃣ A certain X wallet's DeFi section directly integrates with the contract, without relying on the frontend.
4️⃣ A certain wallet will prompt the heat (call frequency) of the contract when calling it, as a safety reference.
The first two methods are typically used as asset rescue measures when the protocol frontend is closed or not open. The OKX wallet currently mainly integrates active protocols and does not cover all protocols, while the fourth method, using statistical mathematical means as indicators, is also quite good.
However, "wallet-side integration with contracts" remains the most direct and effective for users.
🤔 So, where are the difficulties?
1️⃣ High workload: The wallet side has to integrate protocol contracts one by one, which is a significant extra burden compared to directly jumping to the dApp.
2️⃣ Lack of standardization: The withdrawal interface names of different protocols are not consistent; some are called Withdraw, others Redeem, and the parameters vary. If standardization could be achieved like for transfers and checking token balances, integration would naturally be smoother.
The good news is that I just learned through an inquiry to AI that the current ERC-4626 (tokenized vault standard) requires a unified Deposit/Withdraw interface, and some protocols already support it.
However, comprehensive adoption will still take time. Until then, users can only remain vigilant and try to operate cautiously.
