After the FET theft, the ASI ecosystem was breached again by the same hacker, with SingularityNET seeing 260 million AGIX and 53.83 million WMTx illegally minted. The incident involves tokens from multiple prominent AI projects and has drawn industry attention as security issues continue to spread.
The latest information shows that the same hacker, after stealing FET tokens, launched another attack on SingularityNET, illegally minting 260 million AGIX and 53.83 million WMTx tokens. This is another security incident suffered by the ASI ecosystem in a short period. As the incident involves a large number of tokens and is linked to multiple well-known AI projects, attention to on-chain security has increased significantly.
Based on currently available information, the primary target of this incident is SingularityNET, with the illegally minted tokens being AGIX and WMTx. These tokens fall within the scope of multiple well-known AI projects, and FET, which was attacked earlier, is also part of the ASI ecosystem. The recurrence of similar security incidents in a short period has led the issues faced by a single project to be observed at the entire ecosystem level.
In chronological order, FET was first attacked and its tokens were stolen, after which the same hacker turned to SingularityNET and completed the illegal minting of AGIX and WMTx. The successive actions by the same attacker within a short period are a direct reflection of the continued spread of related security incidents. Existing information emphasizes that both attacks point to the same entity, but further technical details about the two incidents have not yet been disclosed.
In terms of the scale of illegal minting, the number of AGIX tokens in this incident reached 260 million, while WMTx reached 53.83 million. The relevant material clearly states that this security incident involves a substantial amount of funds and tokens from multiple well-known AI projects. This is also the main reason the incident was listed as the most-watched on-chain security event of the day.
As of now, public information has not explained the specific method by which the attacker carried out the illegal minting, nor has the specific flow of the illegally minted tokens been disclosed. For on-chain security incidents, key information such as the attack path, vulnerability location, and fund destination still awaits further explanation from officials or security agencies. Within the scope of existing information, the core facts that outsiders can confirm are limited to the attacker's identity association, the targeted project, and the amount of illegal minting.
From an ecosystem security perspective, the ASI ecosystem has been invaded by the same hacker again after the FET theft, with a clear pattern of continued security incidents. Existing information does not clarify whether there are shared contract flaws or infrastructure issues among the multiple projects, but the same attacker's repeated success in a short period has made this ecosystem a key focus in the field of on-chain security. The trust pressure caused by successive security incidents on the relevant projects and users is also difficult to ignore.
In terms of impact, given the variety and large quantity of tokens involved, and the connection to multiple projects in the AI sector, this security incident has gone beyond the scope of a single project or a single token anomaly. It has prompted outsiders to re-examine the overall security situation of the relevant ecosystem. It should be noted that current analysis of the incident's impact is mainly based on disclosed information, and specific technical causes and subsequent effects remain to be confirmed.
In summary, the core facts of the incident can be summarized as follows: the same hacker attacked SingularityNET again after the FET theft; 260 million AGIX and 53.83 million WMTx tokens were illegally minted; the involved tokens are associated with multiple well-known AI projects; and the security incident continues to spread involving a large amount of funds. The above information is all derived from the original news material, with no further technical details available for confirmation at this time.
Directions worth watching include: whether officials will release more investigation information about the illegal minting incident; whether on-chain security teams will continue to track the attacker's behavior and the flow of involved tokens; whether related projects will issue statements or take measures regarding the abnormal token minting; and whether the same attacker will continue to target other projects. These questions all require further verification and it is not appropriate to make definitive judgments at this time.