After a 220M exploit rocked CETUS DEX on Sui, the real question isn’t just how it happened — it’s what happened next.
Sui validators froze 160M in stolen funds. And that single move? Lit a fire under the decentralization debate.
Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko didn’t hold back: “If a minority can override the network, it’s not decentralized.”
On May 22, attackers found an overflow bug in the CETUS smart contract — specifically in the add_liquidity()
function.
Result?
Quick response? Yes. But also a centralized power move in the eyes of many.
Forget vibes. Anatoly wants metrics.
“If a small group can freeze or veto the majority’s will — that’s not decentralization. That’s just branding.”
His statement came after Sui’s validator set froze the hacker’s wallet via coordinated action, without an on-chain vote.
Critics say:
Cyber Capital’s Justin Bons called the action “purely centralized,” while user @Loonies posted:
“You froze it. You own it. You’re a fintech company.”
But not everyone’s mad.
Amogh Gupta from the Sui Foundation claims it was distributed governance in action.
And others point out:
DeFi advocate Cassie put it simply:
“Freezing a hacker isn’t centralization. It’s called showing up.”
Adding to the tension: Sui’s on-chain visibility is limited — making it hard for researchers to trace what happened and how.
No real-time analytics = no community oversight. Which raises the decentralization red flag even higher.
Lesson: If your blockchain can stop the code, then code isn't law — human judgment is.
And the crypto world? Still can’t agree if that’s good or dangerous.
Have questions or want to collaborate? Reach us at: info@ath.live