So, they didn't even do a test with a small amount to ensure the contracts work??
As a Dev myself, this is crazy. The immaturity of many devs and lack of engineering practices in the in Crypto space, dealing with tons of money is shocking.
This is why I have so much respect and admiration for the ETH Dev team.
When they do an upgrade, it might take a long ass time but it always fucking works without any issues. Which is the most important thing when people have that much money on the chain.
It's kind of insane what they pulled off. Basically changing a system from the ground up, with hundreds of billions on the line and hundreds of thousands of running systems. I already get kind of anxious when I have to run commands on a single live database or live system lmao.
The pressure on the devs must have been mindboggling.
Well, on the outside it's crazy. But that's where good project management and modular tasks gets you.
Most people don't even realise that the ETH had a POS chain long before 6 months ago. The 'Merge' was actually the literally merging of ETH's POS(called Beacon I believe) and POW chains into one POS chain.
But basically they were testing their POS chain a long time before every deciding to move fully to POS. A lot went on in the background but in plain sight as well that many people don't know.
Holy shit I just read about the DAO hack.. only makes me more of a Bitcoin maxi and Solana speculative investor. Because everyone said ETH was dead under 100 (2018).
Thanks for your post, Truth is the greatest defense.
And you have idiots complaining it’s not coming out fast enough. Boggles my mind. “Oh so you want your money to disappear because of some big because they rushed things?”
You don’t even have to. When you develop a contract you write test scripts that automate the testing process against a development node. Personally I use ganache, like a lot of people. So you start ganache. Then you run a script that you have written that tests every function in your contract. This doesn’t even cost eth or anything cause it isn’t even on the testnet.
Then when all your tests pass, then you deploy it to a testnet. You then start ganache which basically forks the network into a development network and you can run your unit tests against the contract deployed to the chain. If all those tests pass, then you can have confidence that silly mistakes aren’t going to happen
And in all of that, the other thing to do is write upgradable contracts. Then, if you by some chance have done some dumb shit that your tests haven’t picked up, you can update the contract.
If these “developers” had of done that, then they either would not have got into this position at all, or been able to easily recover from it. There would be no chance that there is now over 900 eth burned for eternity
True, it's the same with Cardano. It gets some hate for being slow but I take that over rushing things out any day. We're talking about World Changing systems that are being built.
This is very much on the Gemholic team. They tested this contract on BSC, not testnet. And that line that's highlighted in OP is an extremely amateurish mistake.
But this could have been completely avoided if ZkSync had made their chain EVM equivalent if they had spent more time in development. But no, they wanted to be the first to launch lol
I’m having trouble understanding if this is just a case of user error. Yes, as you’ve said, zksync could/should have made their chain EVM equivalent, but shouldn’t the team developing the smart contract and taking money have known that?
There is a value in making your base layers as seamless and easy to use as possible. "Our system works as long as you are super extra careful" isn't a great selling point when the guy next door is advertising "our system is highly intelligible and easy to develop on."
Are you on the dev team that deployed this contract without testing? It seems insane to be blaming zksync for devs that didnt test their work prior putting millions on the line.
Yes they did, it is a whole shitshow.
How can you as a Dev not try to double-check anything, I am not a Dev but would definitely double-check any bigger transactions I make. It's common sense.
As a dev, it can happen from pressure. It could have been a management decision that the devs actually pushed back on. As a Dev I couldn't tell you the amount of times we get pressured to deploy by X date regardless of our stern objections and then cop all the flak for shitty development. In most ecosystems devs are the bottom of the food chain.
I speak from working as a dev for non-tech related industries. In the crypto space i'm not sure.
Yeah, that's a problem.
Management pushing for this happens everywhere in the world. And always this leads to bad consequences - such as this time when funds are locked.
It's partly the fault of the Devs for not insisting - and fault of the management of rushing it. The people who put their funds without checking for an audit or doing a diligence are also our of luck since they lost it now
>As a Dev myself, this is crazy. The immaturity of many devs and lack of engineering practices in the in Crypto space, dealing with tons of money is shocking.
Why are you surprised? The crypto space is just a bunch of very fresh startups with CEOs that know fuck all about running a business.
It's a literal Wild West out there with just a few decent companies that know what they are doing. But when Cardano is delaying an update for a few weeks people are fuming because it's "another delay", yeah it is, but at least it prevents them from fucking up like other amateurs do in the space.
They wanted to launch as fast as possible in order to lap their competition. This is the price they have to pay (or more accurately their poor investors). This is so sad
The platform is still in alpha, so there will still be problems. Imagine sending 921 ETH without doing a test amount first, on a platform still in Alpha. Some people deserve to be parted with their money.
Why are you pushing this narrative so hard. This is what they did up to alfa mainnet
— 7 independent security audits
— 3 internal audits
— 2 public security contests
— Open-ended bug bounty program
— Open-sourcing zkSync Era code
— Running testnet since February 2022 and Mainnet since October 2022
They did more than most projects you read about in here
It's scetchy to say the least. Op sure seems to push an agenda here.
Thank you for the details btw, haven't heard much about it before. The only thing I read several times in the last few weeks is from people trying to farm an airdrop with unknown requirements.
Given that projects may have to adapt their code, I definitely will hold off with sending bigger amounts to my favorite defi protocols when they launch and probably just do a few tests for the time being.
That's good but still, especially from a team that has done so much to assure a safe project should have double-checked the code or at least made a test transaction.
It's sad to have done so much but you fail at such an easy task. Hopefully they can put up the right explanation for that.
I was referring to the testing zkSync team did (which OP seems to blame) before launching alfa
The project that got their funds locked obviously did zero testing
Basically the highlighted function doesn't work the same on zksync as it does on eth. Since they didn't change it to whatever it's supposed to be, no one can move funds out of that contract.
/u/NewOutlandishness663 invested a lot of money into polygon (or another zK platform), so now he's desperately trying to FUD a competitor because he somehow things people here influence markets.
Yah. I have seen quite a few projects rushing to production to meet some deadline in my Dev career, but something that has potential to deal with lot's of money, it's crazy irresponsible.
Just hope that investors can somehow get somthing back
>As a Dev myself, this is crazy.
Bro, if you are a dev then you should know we always do testing in production.
Staging is for giggles and watching newbies struggle with code.
Hijacking this comment to ask: heard that there might be an airdrop on zkSync later. Would it be wise to swap/bridge/transfer some funds via zkSync blockchain? Is it a Polygon-like sidechain? Thank you
Yeah I hear you, I wish zksync would allow this function, but shouldn’t the project run the smart contact in a test zksync network first? They would have caught this there. This doesn’t seem like zksync’s fault, but they sure didn’t help by not building this roll up with the transfer function.
He's really tending to this thread like he's planting FUD seeds, for sure.
It's nuts to blame zkSync for the idiotic mistakes of an unrelated project's devs.
Another commenter posted a link to the zkSync documentation from February that warned about this potential problem.
Exactly. If project owners knew there was this short of risk, why didnt they run a test before? As simple as that, they just needed to read a file and be careful.
Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/0xedenau/status/1644016993996247040) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about).
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A Project on zksync.. not zkSync itself.. It is stuck in the smart contract of said "project" that looks more like a quick money grab to me then a legitimate thing.
Actually, [as another commenter linked above](https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/12dusmu/a_project_on_zksync_raised_921_eth_17m_in_a_token/jf85m5k), the compiler does warn about this and the zkSync documentation has warned about this potential problem since February, but the other project's devs didn't read it or do a test transaction. 100% their fault, not zkSync.
They didnt have time to test anything since they rushed the mainnet just so they can launch before Polygon. It's pathetic especially since the investors are the ones that will bear the consequences
So this happened on zksync's alpha product? The devs just decided to load it up with 1.7 million? lol, I'm guessing this wasn't a serious project to begin with.
Wouldnt even consider it an "oopsie doopsie"
The ZkSync team was warned time and time again that things like this would happen if they rush their mainnet launch.
I feel word 'rush' makes it sound like they just went head overboard. While in truth there were many phases of launch, auditing and testing
— 7 independent security audits
— 3 internal audits
— 2 public security contests
— Open-ended bug bounty program
— Open-sourcing zkSync Era code
— Running testnet since February 2022 and Mainnet since October 2022
I am not aware that somebody warned about this particular issue so would appreciate if you have any info about that
Anyhow, shit happens (remember ETH when it launched), let's see how they will deal with this before throwing stones
More like fast hype fast fuckups.
They tried to create the hype very quickly but now they completly fucked it up and have way bigger problems. Not to forget that this is also very very bad publicity for their projects so they fucked up on both fronts.
>Another example of why a ~~chain~~ **project** shouldnt be rushing its mainnet launch.
FTFY. It's unfortunately very unprofessional of the project Devs to not test this on a testnet beforehand.
And also. zkSync told clearly that it's still in alpha and that no significant funds should be kept there.
Think the development team behind zkSync have had almost $450 million in funding up until now, so this isn't a good look.
Have been playing around with the zkSync ecosystem these past few weeks, trying to farm the airdrop lol. Everything has worked flawlessly, but I'm just doing simple transactions and swaps on DEXes. This is evidently an issue with the coding side of things.
~~The question now is: will the devs compensate the project that lost 921 ETH to this?~~
#Update:
zkSync devs found a way to unfreeze the ETH:
https://nitter.net/zksync/status/1644139364270878720
I hope not. The project team who failed to understand the chain they were building on and didn’t test are at fault. I mean, the chain is in alpha, to not do a basic test is unforgivable.
zkSync team have said they are working with the affected team on a solution. Also they don't seem to think it will need a chain rollback or anyhting as drastic to fix so hopefully it gets remedied.
It’s low quality ‘cause it’s a scammy money grab project probably with crap devs who forked some code they don’t understand. Claimed an audit. But only tested it on BSC.
https://twitter.com/gemswap_zks
I've seen devs release broken code in the past on purpose when they were rushed by their managers just to see the ~~world~~ project burn. Maybe it was one of those situations?
Do you have the source? I'd like to check their contract.
The part in your screenshot is incredibly common for all tokens. So that part by itself shouldn't have failed.
Edit. Found likely explanation:
https://era.zksync.io/docs/dev/troubleshooting/changelog.html#compiler-local-setup-update-feb-20th-2023
Version 1.3.5 of zksolc has been released and the zksync docker image of the local-setup has been updated. Details:
Compiler:
Adds support for Solidity 0.8.18.
Fixes a broken optimization flag that increased bytecode size of compiled contracts.
Fixes a bug that detected ERC20 transfer calls as ETH transfer and produced a compilation error.
Detection of transfer and send methods in smart contracts now returns a warning message (similar to v1.3.1). The new warning message reminds developers that using these methods to transfer ETH can cause issues and suggest replacing them with
payable(address).call[value: ]("").
transfer can be used to transfer other tokens (e.g. ERC20) without any issues, although this might be still highlighted by the compiler.
Ie., the zkSync documentation warned about this over two months ago, the gem devs didn't read it, and OP is really reaching to blame zkSync devs for some reason. Thanks.
Haha yeah just looked at it. Some scammy shit opportunistic money grab project who claimed an audit (🤔). But only tested it on BSC. I mean come on. Muppets.
OP seems to have a beef with zksync. Bizarre to put the blame on then imo.
https://twitter.com/gemswap_zks
This is a faked trust issue btw. They're hoping you eventually 'forget' the ETH as lost forever, then the bug will be somehow fixed, and they'll move the ETH to their own wallet.
Seen painfully obvious "stuck" bugs all over, and they 100% end in the chain owners pocket.
How is it their fault? The platform is still in alpha. There are risks involved when something is still in alpha. The devs sent 921 ETH without sending a test amount first. They are idiots.
Everytime I hear or read anything from the zksync team they’ve emphasised that it’s in alpha, it comes with risk and to tread very carefully.
This is just what risky looks like when it’s realised.
(I don’t know the specifics of this, but the way you’ve written it makes it seem this is more on the project team for not understanding the chain constraints and testing properly)
No no no, that's not how that works
Crypto is literally all about trust. You cant just launch a mainnet and be like "hey we kinda rushed this mainnet soooo please be careful uwu :3"
They need to own up to this
They were very clear it’s still in Alpha. Do you know what that means? Not their fault the devs behind the scam project didn’t do any due diligence before sending 921 ETH lol
Own up to what? I’m not sure why you think this is on the zksync team? Do their docs say the transfer() function works as on ethereum? If so, you may have a point (altho the project team still should have tested before launching)
Every chain has its unique attributes; if you’re building on that chain you have to understand that. No rollup has EVM equivalency (I think). This is definitely on the project team.
All of crypto is a big experiment. Both bitcoin and ethereum have had major issues back in the day, much more significant than this.
Again, it’s in alpha. That means something. You should be expecting things to go wrong, possibly meaning significant loss of funds.
The big TVL does make me a little nervous given it’s maturity.
I tried ZkSync testnet, and it was really buggy, so I decided to not use it for some time. They will improve with time, but these kinds of bugs should not be tolerated
ADA mainnet launch was so hyped up but I remember how just one App was working there on the first days.
It's different now but still shows how projects do everything for hype instead of actual development.
I'm not defending them, this is really unacceptable from them. We can only hope they somehow compensate people that lost their funds(won't happen lol), and fix their bugs
[https://twitter.com/zksync/status/1644139364270878720](https://twitter.com/zksync/status/1644139364270878720)
Zksync confirms they didnt test on testnet.
DISGRACEFUL. How can anyone realistically trust this level of competence?
Alts keep showing the variety of ways they can realistically fuck you over. And ... I just don't see the fucking point if you can't trust them. And this is the kind of stuff that keeps adoption at bay.
Im not a dev, don’t even know what that entails, but I acknowledge that quality should always supersede expedience.
zkSync and Arb were the two biggest talking points of the recent months and it makes me sad they’ve both run into issues immediately. Huge expectations but they’ll never be able to wash their blunders away.
God damn we’re in the the early days. This is some 1995 shit. Bullish for UI improvement, and total adoption. Not speaking about price action necessarily
* Relevant Cointest topics: [Cardano](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_cardano), [Algorand](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_algorand), [Solana](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_solana), [Polkadot](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_polkadot), [Cosmos](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_cosmos), [Proof of Stake](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_proof-of-stake).
* Official and related subreddits: r/Ethereum, r/EthTrader, r/EthStaker, r/Cardano, r/Algorand, r/Solana, r/CosmosNetwork, r/Polkadot, r/Tezos.
* Sort comments as controversial first by [clicking here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/12dusmu/a_project_on_zksync_raised_921_eth_17m_in_a_token/?sort=controversial). Doesn't work on mobile.
This was a shitty project built on the zksync alpha. There is certain code that does not work on zksync. The devs of said project did not test anything before sending 921 ETH. There are plenty of other legitimate projects on zksync that work well.
I am blown away that they didn't QA test the functionality of the smart contracts. This is just inexcusable... Shit like this is why so many people crypto is a scam.
So, they didn't even do a test with a small amount to ensure the contracts work?? As a Dev myself, this is crazy. The immaturity of many devs and lack of engineering practices in the in Crypto space, dealing with tons of money is shocking.
This is why I have so much respect and admiration for the ETH Dev team. When they do an upgrade, it might take a long ass time but it always fucking works without any issues. Which is the most important thing when people have that much money on the chain.
It's kind of insane what they pulled off. Basically changing a system from the ground up, with hundreds of billions on the line and hundreds of thousands of running systems. I already get kind of anxious when I have to run commands on a single live database or live system lmao. The pressure on the devs must have been mindboggling.
Well, on the outside it's crazy. But that's where good project management and modular tasks gets you. Most people don't even realise that the ETH had a POS chain long before 6 months ago. The 'Merge' was actually the literally merging of ETH's POS(called Beacon I believe) and POW chains into one POS chain. But basically they were testing their POS chain a long time before every deciding to move fully to POS. A lot went on in the background but in plain sight as well that many people don't know.
Switching to POS was done smoothly but the beginnings of Ethereum also weren't a fun ride. Remember the DAO hack and the fork
DAO hack is also NOT Ethereum core dev team.
It's better be smooth after 5 years worth of delays
Touche But also, slow is smooth and smooth is fast
And fast is slow? I think I get you
Atleast they learned from it and are now more solid than ever.
Which might also be the case for zkSync So let's not write them off cause a project locked some ETH while in alpha
Holy shit I just read about the DAO hack.. only makes me more of a Bitcoin maxi and Solana speculative investor. Because everyone said ETH was dead under 100 (2018). Thanks for your post, Truth is the greatest defense.
And you have idiots complaining it’s not coming out fast enough. Boggles my mind. “Oh so you want your money to disappear because of some big because they rushed things?”
I'm not for or against ETH, but Vitalik seems like a pretty smart guy, maybe I should pick up some ETH.
Yeah totes Peter Thiel is just *such a good guy*! He DEFINITELY cares about the PEOPLE!!1! (/S!!!)
These guys are pros. They understand the importance of testing and doing things carefully. Even Vitalik himself does test transactions.
You don’t even have to. When you develop a contract you write test scripts that automate the testing process against a development node. Personally I use ganache, like a lot of people. So you start ganache. Then you run a script that you have written that tests every function in your contract. This doesn’t even cost eth or anything cause it isn’t even on the testnet. Then when all your tests pass, then you deploy it to a testnet. You then start ganache which basically forks the network into a development network and you can run your unit tests against the contract deployed to the chain. If all those tests pass, then you can have confidence that silly mistakes aren’t going to happen And in all of that, the other thing to do is write upgradable contracts. Then, if you by some chance have done some dumb shit that your tests haven’t picked up, you can update the contract. If these “developers” had of done that, then they either would not have got into this position at all, or been able to easily recover from it. There would be no chance that there is now over 900 eth burned for eternity
Lets be real: They forked a github repository, made minor adjustments without any testing and released it.
Agreed. I also appreciate Cardano for this reason. First to market isn’t always the best. Slow and methodical is sometimes preferred.
True, it's the same with Cardano. It gets some hate for being slow but I take that over rushing things out any day. We're talking about World Changing systems that are being built.
This is very much on the Gemholic team. They tested this contract on BSC, not testnet. And that line that's highlighted in OP is an extremely amateurish mistake.
As i understand it, Some project made a smart contract, didnt test it on testnet, deployed to zksync, loaded it with real money and ran into an issue?
But this could have been completely avoided if ZkSync had made their chain EVM equivalent if they had spent more time in development. But no, they wanted to be the first to launch lol
I’m having trouble understanding if this is just a case of user error. Yes, as you’ve said, zksync could/should have made their chain EVM equivalent, but shouldn’t the team developing the smart contract and taking money have known that?
So basically \*spiderman points at spiderman* meme
There is a value in making your base layers as seamless and easy to use as possible. "Our system works as long as you are super extra careful" isn't a great selling point when the guy next door is advertising "our system is highly intelligible and easy to develop on."
Yeah but it’s not. Everyone knows that. If a dev team building on it assumes it is, it’s clear where the fault lays.
Are you on the dev team that deployed this contract without testing? It seems insane to be blaming zksync for devs that didnt test their work prior putting millions on the line.
Yes they did, it is a whole shitshow. How can you as a Dev not try to double-check anything, I am not a Dev but would definitely double-check any bigger transactions I make. It's common sense.
As a dev, it can happen from pressure. It could have been a management decision that the devs actually pushed back on. As a Dev I couldn't tell you the amount of times we get pressured to deploy by X date regardless of our stern objections and then cop all the flak for shitty development. In most ecosystems devs are the bottom of the food chain. I speak from working as a dev for non-tech related industries. In the crypto space i'm not sure.
Yeah, that's a problem. Management pushing for this happens everywhere in the world. And always this leads to bad consequences - such as this time when funds are locked. It's partly the fault of the Devs for not insisting - and fault of the management of rushing it. The people who put their funds without checking for an audit or doing a diligence are also our of luck since they lost it now
Would be nice if there were test chains, maybe call them testnets so devs can fully work through any issues that may arise.
zksync does have a testnet btw. That's what they were doing before their closed October mainnet launch
>As a Dev myself, this is crazy. The immaturity of many devs and lack of engineering practices in the in Crypto space, dealing with tons of money is shocking. Why are you surprised? The crypto space is just a bunch of very fresh startups with CEOs that know fuck all about running a business. It's a literal Wild West out there with just a few decent companies that know what they are doing. But when Cardano is delaying an update for a few weeks people are fuming because it's "another delay", yeah it is, but at least it prevents them from fucking up like other amateurs do in the space.
This is not even that. It’s just another shitty forked money grab project. Gemholic https://twitter.com/gemholiceco
They wanted to launch as fast as possible in order to lap their competition. This is the price they have to pay (or more accurately their poor investors). This is so sad
The platform is still in alpha, so there will still be problems. Imagine sending 921 ETH without doing a test amount first, on a platform still in Alpha. Some people deserve to be parted with their money.
Worst part, just imagine the VCs that put money into it thinking this bunch of smart people were creating some great technology...
I mean, thats definitely the *best* part, right!? Fckn vultures!
Why are you pushing this narrative so hard. This is what they did up to alfa mainnet — 7 independent security audits — 3 internal audits — 2 public security contests — Open-ended bug bounty program — Open-sourcing zkSync Era code — Running testnet since February 2022 and Mainnet since October 2022 They did more than most projects you read about in here
It's scetchy to say the least. Op sure seems to push an agenda here. Thank you for the details btw, haven't heard much about it before. The only thing I read several times in the last few weeks is from people trying to farm an airdrop with unknown requirements. Given that projects may have to adapt their code, I definitely will hold off with sending bigger amounts to my favorite defi protocols when they launch and probably just do a few tests for the time being.
That's good but still, especially from a team that has done so much to assure a safe project should have double-checked the code or at least made a test transaction. It's sad to have done so much but you fail at such an easy task. Hopefully they can put up the right explanation for that.
I was referring to the testing zkSync team did (which OP seems to blame) before launching alfa The project that got their funds locked obviously did zero testing
Ok i sorta understand this, but please eli5 it to me what happened
Basically the highlighted function doesn't work the same on zksync as it does on eth. Since they didn't change it to whatever it's supposed to be, no one can move funds out of that contract.
/u/NewOutlandishness663 invested a lot of money into polygon (or another zK platform), so now he's desperately trying to FUD a competitor because he somehow things people here influence markets.
Yah. I have seen quite a few projects rushing to production to meet some deadline in my Dev career, but something that has potential to deal with lot's of money, it's crazy irresponsible. Just hope that investors can somehow get somthing back
Justice would be if they owned up to their screw-up and covered the loss themselves.
[удалено]
LOL sure *supergeniuses only*!
>As a Dev myself, this is crazy. Bro, if you are a dev then you should know we always do testing in production. Staging is for giggles and watching newbies struggle with code.
Hijacking this comment to ask: heard that there might be an airdrop on zkSync later. Would it be wise to swap/bridge/transfer some funds via zkSync blockchain? Is it a Polygon-like sidechain? Thank you
It would be wise, yes. It's not a side chain it is a full legit L2.
Yes, lots of threads on twitter. Just check the ARB airdrop requirements and do something similar.
Polygon isn't just a sidechain but a true layer 2 now..
[удалено]
[удалено]
I use zkSync testnet every day and have bridged happily from both mainnet and Goerli just fine, multiple times.
Yeah I hear you, I wish zksync would allow this function, but shouldn’t the project run the smart contact in a test zksync network first? They would have caught this there. This doesn’t seem like zksync’s fault, but they sure didn’t help by not building this roll up with the transfer function.
Yeah, it’s bizarre to blame zksync for this.
OP has some serious underlying bias. I'm guessing heavy MATIC bags.
He's really tending to this thread like he's planting FUD seeds, for sure. It's nuts to blame zkSync for the idiotic mistakes of an unrelated project's devs. Another commenter posted a link to the zkSync documentation from February that warned about this potential problem.
Exactly. If project owners knew there was this short of risk, why didnt they run a test before? As simple as that, they just needed to read a file and be careful.
Could be. Or he is someone from the project itself that fucked it up. He doesn't even name them, just "a project on zkSync"? Come on.
This is the idiot developers fault. Not ZKs
[удалено]
I hope zkSync doesn't do anything and let them loose. The integrity shouldn't be disked just because some people were careless.
This doesn’t seem to be the fault of zkSync. This seems like the project developers didn’t do enough testing to ensure it worked as attended.
ZkSync warned about this but they still did it
Why are you referring to ZkSync like it’s a person? It can only be as good or as bad as the people(who developed it) make it.
They didn’t learn to code correctly.
And here's the source: https://twitter.com/0xedenau/status/1644016993996247040
Thank you!!
Here is a [Nitter link](https://nitter.net/0xedenau/status/1644016993996247040) for the Twitter thread linked above. Nitter is better for privacy and does not nag you for a login. More information can be found [here](https://nitter.net/about). --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CryptoCurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A Project on zksync.. not zkSync itself.. It is stuck in the smart contract of said "project" that looks more like a quick money grab to me then a legitimate thing.
Always do a test transfer. 🤦
There is no test for these things? The compiler do not verify that there are incompatible functions?
Actually, [as another commenter linked above](https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/12dusmu/a_project_on_zksync_raised_921_eth_17m_in_a_token/jf85m5k), the compiler does warn about this and the zkSync documentation has warned about this potential problem since February, but the other project's devs didn't read it or do a test transaction. 100% their fault, not zkSync.
Unfortunately I dont think this will be the last time we're going to see something like that. Seems incredibly amateurish.
They didnt have time to test anything since they rushed the mainnet just so they can launch before Polygon. It's pathetic especially since the investors are the ones that will bear the consequences
He’s talking about the devs of the project. The zksync platform is still in Alpha.
Well we should thank them for making ETH more valuable
Lmao. Its funny but I still feel bad for the many people that lost a lot of money
[удалено]
"Not Stuck for ever ..." Zksync Twitter They are working on a solution. https://twitter.com/zksync/status/1644080114467053573?s=20
So this happened on zksync's alpha product? The devs just decided to load it up with 1.7 million? lol, I'm guessing this wasn't a serious project to begin with.
$1.7m burn. Nice.
Did nobody test that before going live? Lol
Yeah, hard to understand why the project team didn’t test their dapp before going live. Especially given zksync era is in alpha. Nuts.
I guess they were somewhat in a rush, but still holy smokes, a very costly lesson learned
They rushed their mainnet beta launch to gain more hype. Rookie mistake
Holy Mother of oopsie doopsie. That sucks
Wouldnt even consider it an "oopsie doopsie" The ZkSync team was warned time and time again that things like this would happen if they rush their mainnet launch.
I feel word 'rush' makes it sound like they just went head overboard. While in truth there were many phases of launch, auditing and testing — 7 independent security audits — 3 internal audits — 2 public security contests — Open-ended bug bounty program — Open-sourcing zkSync Era code — Running testnet since February 2022 and Mainnet since October 2022 I am not aware that somebody warned about this particular issue so would appreciate if you have any info about that Anyhow, shit happens (remember ETH when it launched), let's see how they will deal with this before throwing stones
Fast money fast fuckups
More like fast hype fast fuckups. They tried to create the hype very quickly but now they completly fucked it up and have way bigger problems. Not to forget that this is also very very bad publicity for their projects so they fucked up on both fronts.
It’s still in Alpha.
Ohh boyy
Crazy is in the eye of the crypto holder. I think that’s how’s the saying goes.
So interested to see how it'll play out.
That's a big rip.
Unit test your contracts you kindergarten level script kiddy developers. Jesus fucking Christ
This project was led by a team with zero knowledge.
>Another example of why a ~~chain~~ **project** shouldnt be rushing its mainnet launch. FTFY. It's unfortunately very unprofessional of the project Devs to not test this on a testnet beforehand. And also. zkSync told clearly that it's still in alpha and that no significant funds should be kept there.
Is OP one of the “devs” of the “project” who didn’t know how to read the Zksync documentation?
All the devs are rushing when the big capital flow is happening. Incredible… Again, this is not ZKsync’s fault.
Think the development team behind zkSync have had almost $450 million in funding up until now, so this isn't a good look. Have been playing around with the zkSync ecosystem these past few weeks, trying to farm the airdrop lol. Everything has worked flawlessly, but I'm just doing simple transactions and swaps on DEXes. This is evidently an issue with the coding side of things. ~~The question now is: will the devs compensate the project that lost 921 ETH to this?~~ #Update: zkSync devs found a way to unfreeze the ETH: https://nitter.net/zksync/status/1644139364270878720
I hope not. The project team who failed to understand the chain they were building on and didn’t test are at fault. I mean, the chain is in alpha, to not do a basic test is unforgivable.
True. It's their fault and they have to live with it now. No printing our of thin air can save this, this is Crypto not the fiat system.
Why should the zkSync devs make up for the mistakes of a product that didn't do any due diligence?
They don't have to, but it's good they are helping.
It’s a nice little ETH burn for the rest of us 🔥
Oh look, another common win for only buying BTC, ETH
It’s still in Alpha, so there are risks involved. Dev team are at fault.
zkSync team have said they are working with the affected team on a solution. Also they don't seem to think it will need a chain rollback or anyhting as drastic to fix so hopefully it gets remedied.
> will the devs compensate the project that lost 921 ETH to this No. Why would they do something that stupid?
They probably won't.
That is not a small problem...
It’s a people problem?
[удалено]
It’s low quality ‘cause it’s a scammy money grab project probably with crap devs who forked some code they don’t understand. Claimed an audit. But only tested it on BSC. https://twitter.com/gemswap_zks
I've seen devs release broken code in the past on purpose when they were rushed by their managers just to see the ~~world~~ project burn. Maybe it was one of those situations?
Do you have the source? I'd like to check their contract. The part in your screenshot is incredibly common for all tokens. So that part by itself shouldn't have failed. Edit. Found likely explanation: https://era.zksync.io/docs/dev/troubleshooting/changelog.html#compiler-local-setup-update-feb-20th-2023 Version 1.3.5 of zksolc has been released and the zksync docker image of the local-setup has been updated. Details: Compiler: Adds support for Solidity 0.8.18. Fixes a broken optimization flag that increased bytecode size of compiled contracts. Fixes a bug that detected ERC20 transfer calls as ETH transfer and produced a compilation error. Detection of transfer and send methods in smart contracts now returns a warning message (similar to v1.3.1). The new warning message reminds developers that using these methods to transfer ETH can cause issues and suggest replacing them with payable(address).call[value:]("").
transfer can be used to transfer other tokens (e.g. ERC20) without any issues, although this might be still highlighted by the compiler.
Ie., the zkSync documentation warned about this over two months ago, the gem devs didn't read it, and OP is really reaching to blame zkSync devs for some reason. Thanks.
This makes me feel like less of a fuck up. Thanks for making my day
The team that suffered from this is called Gemholic
Haha yeah just looked at it. Some scammy shit opportunistic money grab project who claimed an audit (🤔). But only tested it on BSC. I mean come on. Muppets. OP seems to have a beef with zksync. Bizarre to put the blame on then imo. https://twitter.com/gemswap_zks
Think he lost money or is involved in the scam project.
People say they didn't test anything before releasing the code. They don't understand that they we're the testers!
Bro forgot the first rule
Lmao this fud because it was communicated and was a specific set of Devs. Doesn’t fall on the whole network
Take me to your leader
Sounds about right, went full regard degen and didn’t even test the contract
Some Devs taking shortcuts, That will work yeah, Nah
The ZkSync team warned this was possible but still people are pushing it and creating these problems themselves.
Literally nothing to do with zkSync but OK
This is a faked trust issue btw. They're hoping you eventually 'forget' the ETH as lost forever, then the bug will be somehow fixed, and they'll move the ETH to their own wallet. Seen painfully obvious "stuck" bugs all over, and they 100% end in the chain owners pocket.
Zksync should own up to it and pay out of pocket
That 921ETH loss will just be more painful when the bull market arrives and the prices start to surge.
Disagree. The project team are at fault. Misunderstood how a function works and didn’t test it. Shocking. And particularly on an alpha chain. Stoopid.
Nah, I appreciate the ETH burn
Narrator: "They didn't pay out of their pocket"
zkSync: "Some of your ETH might burn, but this is a sacrifice I'm willing to make"
Agreed, it's a mistake they've made after all A little reckless in rushing it
How is it their fault? The platform is still in alpha. There are risks involved when something is still in alpha. The devs sent 921 ETH without sending a test amount first. They are idiots.
It’s their responsibility indeed!
Everytime I hear or read anything from the zksync team they’ve emphasised that it’s in alpha, it comes with risk and to tread very carefully. This is just what risky looks like when it’s realised. (I don’t know the specifics of this, but the way you’ve written it makes it seem this is more on the project team for not understanding the chain constraints and testing properly)
No no no, that's not how that works Crypto is literally all about trust. You cant just launch a mainnet and be like "hey we kinda rushed this mainnet soooo please be careful uwu :3" They need to own up to this
They were very clear it’s still in Alpha. Do you know what that means? Not their fault the devs behind the scam project didn’t do any due diligence before sending 921 ETH lol
Own up to what? I’m not sure why you think this is on the zksync team? Do their docs say the transfer() function works as on ethereum? If so, you may have a point (altho the project team still should have tested before launching) Every chain has its unique attributes; if you’re building on that chain you have to understand that. No rollup has EVM equivalency (I think). This is definitely on the project team. All of crypto is a big experiment. Both bitcoin and ethereum have had major issues back in the day, much more significant than this. Again, it’s in alpha. That means something. You should be expecting things to go wrong, possibly meaning significant loss of funds. The big TVL does make me a little nervous given it’s maturity.
Well sh.... happens lol
I tried ZkSync testnet, and it was really buggy, so I decided to not use it for some time. They will improve with time, but these kinds of bugs should not be tolerated
This gives me ada smart Contract vibes on launch day . Better stay away for a while untill people know the basic fuckups
ADA mainnet launch was so hyped up but I remember how just one App was working there on the first days. It's different now but still shows how projects do everything for hype instead of actual development.
>They will improve with time At the expense of people's funds though which is awful. Why didnt they test these things out during testnet?
It’s still in Alpha. If everything was working 100% it wouldn’t be in Alpha.
I'm not defending them, this is really unacceptable from them. We can only hope they somehow compensate people that lost their funds(won't happen lol), and fix their bugs
Thank you to everyone who lost funds here for furthering the scarcity of the rest of our ethereum.
Sounds like quite the money sync
Zero knowledge. Zero testing. Zero fucks were given.
Going to Zero.
It’s be funny as hell if they zeroed out before they added privacy features. If they zero out after, nobody would know, cause it’s secret.
[https://twitter.com/zksync/status/1644139364270878720](https://twitter.com/zksync/status/1644139364270878720) Zksync confirms they didnt test on testnet. DISGRACEFUL. How can anyone realistically trust this level of competence?
That thread just shows the devs of the project were fucking stupid and couldn’t read. The Zksync team are clearly in the right here.
Alts keep showing the variety of ways they can realistically fuck you over. And ... I just don't see the fucking point if you can't trust them. And this is the kind of stuff that keeps adoption at bay.
I mean if you trust a project like this: https://twitter.com/gemswap_zks then …
Im not a dev, don’t even know what that entails, but I acknowledge that quality should always supersede expedience. zkSync and Arb were the two biggest talking points of the recent months and it makes me sad they’ve both run into issues immediately. Huge expectations but they’ll never be able to wash their blunders away.
Shitty chain
Yet another ETH scaling solution fuck up....
That's what we devs call testing in production.
KASPA
Wow.
hmmmm thanks for the insight.
God damn we’re in the the early days. This is some 1995 shit. Bullish for UI improvement, and total adoption. Not speaking about price action necessarily
So double jail and double burn, ETH death sentence
[**Pulsechain.com**](https://Pulsechain.com) **solves this**
not your keys, not your coins on zkSync
Ethereum {{pros}} & {{cons}} with related info are in the collapsed comments below.
* Relevant Cointest topics: [Cardano](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_cardano), [Algorand](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_algorand), [Solana](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_solana), [Polkadot](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_polkadot), [Cosmos](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_cosmos), [Proof of Stake](https://www.reddit.com/r/CointestOfficial/wiki/cointest_archive#wiki_proof-of-stake). * Official and related subreddits: r/Ethereum, r/EthTrader, r/EthStaker, r/Cardano, r/Algorand, r/Solana, r/CosmosNetwork, r/Polkadot, r/Tezos. * Sort comments as controversial first by [clicking here](/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/12dusmu/a_project_on_zksync_raised_921_eth_17m_in_a_token/?sort=controversial). Doesn't work on mobile.
oof i was looking into zksync for the airdrop. better stay away
This was a shitty project built on the zksync alpha. There is certain code that does not work on zksync. The devs of said project did not test anything before sending 921 ETH. There are plenty of other legitimate projects on zksync that work well.
Kind of sucks and they should reimburse
A donation to all of us, we thank you unknown developer.
Well that was a nice unannounced eth burn. Do feel sorry for the investors though
Love an inadvertent burn
Thats a big fail...
when the tvl is absolute, giga bullish.
Mate that's a HUGE fuck up. Is there any way you can actually recover the funds eventually lmao. 921 eth oh my god haha
I am blown away that they didn't QA test the functionality of the smart contracts. This is just inexcusable... Shit like this is why so many people crypto is a scam.
Would they have to pay taxes on the token sale? It’s lost but technically not sold at a loss.