The first scenario is far cheaper but runs the risk of rsETH depegging an estimated 15%, while the second is costlier but better protects Ethereum mainnet and concentratesThe first scenario is far cheaper but runs the risk of rsETH depegging an estimated 15%, while the second is costlier but better protects Ethereum mainnet and concentrates

Aave risk manager models 2 bad debt scenarios from Kelp DAO exploit

2026/04/21 11:41
3분 읽기
이 콘텐츠에 대한 의견이나 우려 사항이 있으시면 crypto.news@mexc.com으로 연락주시기 바랍니다

Decentralized lending platform Aave’s risk management provider has outlined two scenarios on how bad debt from the Kelp DAO exploit over the weekend could impact the ecosystem, depending on how the losses are allocated.

The incident began on Saturday when hackers stole 116,500 Kelp DAO Restaked ETH (rsETH) tokens worth $293 million from Kelp DAO’s LayerZero-powered bridge and used them as collateral on Aave V3 to borrow wrapped Ether (wETH).

On Monday, LlamaRisk modeled two possible scenarios for how this “bad debt” could materialize on Aave, noting that the final decision rests with Kelp DAO.

The incident highlights the contagion risk in DeFi, where a single bridge exploit can trigger liquidity crunches and mass withdrawals across interconnected protocols like Aave, which has seen nearly $10 billion in value leave the protocol since the Kelp DAO exploit took place.

Source: Aave

Two scenarios and potential paths forward

The first scenario would see losses spread across all rsETH token holders on Ethereum mainnet and Ethereum layer 2s, resulting in roughly $123.7 million of bad debt on Aave while risking a 15% depeg in rsETH relative to Ether (ETH).

LlamaRisk said this first scenario would spread losses more thinly across all chains, while noting that wrapped Ether (wETH) would be “absorbing the bulk in absolute terms but barely noticing it relative to its reserve depth.”

Aave could also use its Umbrella security model to cover losses in wETH under the first scenario, noting that 18,922 Aave Wrapped ETH (aWETH) tokens worth nearly $43.7 million have entered the unstaking cooldown phase.

The second scenario would shift the entire shortfall to Ethereum layer 2 networks, such as Arbitrum and Mantle. However, the bad debt would be significantly higher at $230.1 million.

LlamaRisk also noted that Aave has around $181 million in its treasury that could be used to address a potential bad debt shortfall.

Scenario comparison of LlamaRisk’s two scenarios. Source: Aave

Related: Aave DAO backs V4 mainnet plan in near-unanimous vote

On Monday, Kelp DAO said it is still assessing the financial impact of the exploit and how to safely unpause the protocol, adding that it is working with Aave, LayerZero and other stakeholders on a path forward.

Kelp DAO sheds more light on the exploit

Kelp DAO also shared more details about the incident, saying that two nodes tied to the LayerZero bridge were compromised, while a third was hit with a distributed denial-of-service attack.

The attacker forged a seemingly valid transfer message that the system approved, allowing 116,500 rsETH to be minted on one of LayerZero’s bridges.

Kelp said it paused all relevant contracts on Ethereum and Ethereum layer 2s and blacklisted all wallets tied to the exploiter shortly after, preventing them from stealing another 40,000 rsETH worth $95 million.

Magazine: Are DeFi devs liable for the illegal activity of others on their platforms?

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
  • #Lending
  • #Tokens
  • #Hacks
  • #Aave
  • #Layer2
  • #Industry
시장 기회
에이브 로고
에이브 가격(AAVE)
$92.75
$92.75$92.75
+6.32%
USD
에이브 (AAVE) 실시간 가격 차트
면책 조항: 본 사이트에 재게시된 글들은 공개 플랫폼에서 가져온 것으로 정보 제공 목적으로만 제공됩니다. 이는 반드시 MEXC의 견해를 반영하는 것은 아닙니다. 모든 권리는 원저자에게 있습니다. 제3자의 권리를 침해하는 콘텐츠가 있다고 판단될 경우, crypto.news@mexc.com으로 연락하여 삭제 요청을 해주시기 바랍니다. MEXC는 콘텐츠의 정확성, 완전성 또는 시의적절성에 대해 어떠한 보증도 하지 않으며, 제공된 정보에 기반하여 취해진 어떠한 조치에 대해서도 책임을 지지 않습니다. 본 콘텐츠는 금융, 법률 또는 기타 전문적인 조언을 구성하지 않으며, MEXC의 추천이나 보증으로 간주되어서는 안 됩니다.

USD1 Genesis: 0 Fees + 12% APR

USD1 Genesis: 0 Fees + 12% APRUSD1 Genesis: 0 Fees + 12% APR

New users: stake for up to 600% APR. Limited time!