On-chain data analysis: Massive pGALA minting may be self-staged by the project team
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
On-chain data analysis: Massive pGALA minting may be self-staged by the project team
Chain data analysis revealed that the project team likely orchestrated the entire event themselves.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsAuthor: Haotian, blockchain security practitioner
There were media reports claiming that pNetwork suffered a hacker attack, resulting in the minting of additional pGALA tokens, which triggered an arbitrage disaster between DEXs and centralized exchanges. After digging deep into on-chain data, I found strong evidence suggesting this was likely a self-inflicted incident orchestrated by the project team—attempting to drain liquidity from old pools through massive token minting, but moving too hastily and crashing the price, thereby disrupting market order.
At 4:28 AM today, pNetwork issued an official announcement stating that their original cross-chain bridge protocol had security vulnerabilities, so they needed to deploy new contracts. They emphasized that snapshots had already been taken for airdrops and urged users not to trade in PancakeSwap pools.
However, at 4:13 and 4:27 respectively, an address minted approximately 55.6 billion pGALA tokens in two separate transactions—so who exactly carried out these mints?
Perhaps the project team refuses to acknowledge that the address starting with 0x6891a23 is theirs, but look at the timeline: Mint occurred at 4:27, and the Twitter announcement followed just one minute later at 4:28.
If this were truly a hacker attack, the project should have immediately announced they were under infinite minting attack and warned users of risks. But they didn’t do any of that. The only plausible explanation is that the team itself attempted to use massive minting to "redeem" liquidity from trading pools.
Then at 5:29, the “project team” began dumping—initially selling only three to four million GALA per transaction. By 6:09, they dumped 279 million in one go. In the final transaction at 6:16, they dumped 2.1 billion tokens all at once—how could the market possibly withstand such actions?
Withdrawing liquidity should be done gradually. As the project team, didn't they consider the potential chain reaction such operations might trigger?
Here’s where it gets suspicious: notice there was one trader who made a $6.5 million arbitrage profit. He entered the market buying large amounts of pGALA aggressively at 6:10, less than one minute after the project team's first dump of 279 million tokens.
What kind of expert can react to information this quickly? Isn't the execution efficiency of this arbitrage strategy way too high?
It’s utterly baffling—perhaps the project team should come forward and explain?
On-chain address: https://bscscan.com/address/0x2aacd883f9b9e2931b116236d905d7f079fc7eec
While we can't draw 100% definitive conclusions, the on-chain data does reveal some truths. The chaotic emergency response and lack of effective communication with exchanges exposed the project team's inexperience in handling security incidents, as well as their failure to anticipate potential market impacts.
Someone must be held accountable. Uninformed retail investors indeed suffered losses innocently. Maybe Brother Sun should confront the project team directly.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
