Binance, the world’s leading crypto exchange by trading volume, is in the news for a supposed attack on its Bitcoin Futures. The update was shared officially by the CEO and Founder of Binance, Changpeng Zhao or CZ as he is widely referred to, on September 16, 2019, through his Twitter handle.
As CZ highlighted in his initial tweet, a recognized market maker had targeted the Futures platform of Binance around midnight on September 15, 2019. However, the “attacker” failed to cause any harm to Bitcoin Futures and its users as Binance uses index price instead of the futures price for liquidations. Hence, the “supposed attack” achieved zero liquidation. CZ also revealed that the only person who suffered some financial loss in the act was “the attacker” himself.
According to CZ, the move was carried out by a market maker from a smaller futures exchange who has an established and eminent trading account with Binance. Providing further details, CZ said that this “attacker” has also started their very own futures exchange just several months back. Calling out on the action as “shame”, CZ revealed that this was the second time that the market maker had attempted something like this.
While Binance users and crypto community were engaged in this sudden new revelation, CZ posted another tweet after a couple of hours that left people a bit surprised. In his tweet, Binance CEO disclosed that what he termed as an attack a few hours ago, was actually an accident. The incident was not at all intentional, and it had taken place because of the bad parameters on the client’s side, stated Zhao. CZ made these remarks after chatting with the client to conclude his series of tweets saying everything was good now.
A market maker from a smaller futures exchange tried to attack @binance futures platform. NO ONE was liquidated, as we use the index price (not futures prices) for liquidations (our innovation). Only the attacker lost a bunch of money, and that was that. pic.twitter.com/ztMZEtYKc6
— CZ Binance (@cz_binance) September 16, 2019
Learning about the latest development on the matter, several users tried defending the client. A number of users tweeted saying that prior to publicly calling out the “attacker”, the team should have investigated the matter and reached out to the client.
usually one “has a chat” with the client FIRST, before calling them out publicly right? 🤷♀️
— 🍄🌲BenjaminBlunts🌲🍄 (@SmartContracter) September 16, 2019
While replying to CZ’s initial tweet, another user even questioned asking how does it become an attack in the first place if no one was liquidated.
How is that an attack…i dont get it
— G Flight (@gflightvibes) September 16, 2019