Proposal #155
Referendum #143

Compensation Claim for Wrongful Liquidation Caused by Oracle Failure During the Hyperbridge Exploit (April 13, 2026)

Democracy
5hrs 14mins ago
0
Started

Discussion post https://interlay.subsquare.io/posts/66
Compensation Claim for Wrongful Liquidation Caused by Oracle Failure During the Hyperbridge Exploit (April 13, 2026)
Claimant Address: wdCqxq8RoyA9eW7AMcWxm11CMqcr3avEXj8V661VnUZpoG1kb Date of Incident: April 13, 2026 Date of Submission: April 14, 2026 Affected Protocol: Interlay Lending Market Affected Asset: vDOT (Bifrost Voucher DOT on Interlay)


  1. Incident Summary
    On April 13, 2026, a critical security exploit was carried out against the Hyperbridge cross-chain bridge infrastructure. The attacker exploited a vulnerability in the bridge's minting logic on the Ethereum network, creating a large quantity of fraudulent DOT representations. This caused severe and artificial price distortion for DOT and its derivative assets — including vDOT — specifically within Ethereum-side liquidity pools.
    Critically, this price distortion was isolated to Ethereum-side markets and did not reflect any change in the underlying value of DOT or vDOT on the native Polkadot network. On-chain data from Bifrost — the issuer and custodian of vDOT — confirmed that vDOT maintained its expected price and peg throughout the entire incident.
    Despite this, Interlay's Oracle price feed, which sourced vDOT pricing data from Ethereum-side liquidity pools rather than from Bifrost's native on-chain feed, ingested the corrupted price data and triggered an automated liquidation of my borrowing position. This liquidation was not a result of any genuine deterioration in collateral value but was entirely a consequence of the protocol consuming manipulated external data.

  1. Loss Details
    Item Detail
    Collateral Asset vDOT
    Amount Liquidated 4,257 vDOT
    Debt Position at Liquidation ~4,000 USDT
    Fair Market Value of Collateral ~4,500 USDT (based on pre-incident Bifrost native price)
    Net Loss ~4,500 USDT (collateral value minus debt)
    Compensation Requested 4,500 USDT

  1. Core Liability Argument: Oracle Design Failure
    3.1 Faulty Data Source Selection
    Interlay's Oracle for vDOT pricing relied on Ethereum-side liquidity pool data, which was directly exposed to and corrupted by the Hyperbridge exploit. At the same time, Bifrost — as the official issuer of vDOT and the authoritative source for its redemption value — maintained an accurate and stable on-chain price feed throughout the incident on the native Polkadot network.
    The protocol's failure to use or cross-reference Bifrost's native price feed as a primary or fallback data source represents a fundamental Oracle design flaw. The accurate price data was available and accessible; the protocol simply was not configured to use it.

Factual Basis
• The Hyperbridge team has publicly confirmed the exploit as a bridge-layer attack
This was not a market risk event. It was a protocol infrastructure failure.


  1. On-Chain Implementation
    This proposal requests the following on-chain actions upon passage of this referendum:
    Call 1 — 4,500 USDT Compensation
    Note on funding source: The Interlay money market account (wd9yNSwR5jsJWJZ6yzpWRRhe59Z8xLQvZpxrPF7ux76mKaBZ6) currently holds approximately 117,338 USDT, as verified on-chain. The requested compensation of 4,500 USDT represents less than 4% of available USDT liquidity and is well within the protocol's capacity to absorb without impacting normal lending market operations.

  1. Requested Actions
  2. Financial Compensation: Credit of 4,500 USDT to the claimant's address as full settlement for losses incurred due to the oracle failure
  3. Oracle Improvement: A public commitment from the Interlay development team to integrate Bifrost's native on-chain price feed as a primary or weighted data source for vDOT pricing
  4. Risk Controls: Implementation of price deviation circuit breakers and emergency pause mechanisms for liquidations during abnormal market conditions or detected bridge exploits

  1. Conclusion
    This claim is not based on normal market risk. Every participant in DeFi accepts volatility — but no participant should bear losses caused by a protocol consuming demonstrably corrupted data when accurate data was available from the asset's own issuer.
    The amount requested is modest. Approving this proposal would demonstrate that Interlay takes protocol-level failures seriously, protects its users from infrastructure risks outside their control, and holds itself to the standard expected of a mature DeFi protocol in the Polkadot ecosystem.
    I remain committed to the Interlay and Polkadot ecosystems and look forward to a fair resolution.

All on-chain data referenced in this proposal was verified directly via Polkadot.js Apps connected to Interlay's RPC endpoint (wss://rpc-interlay.luckyfriday.io) on April 19, 2026.

Edited
Reply
Up
Share
Votes
AyePassing thresholdNay
5%95%
Aye
13,000vINTR
Nay
265KvINTR
Turnout
278KvINTR
Electorate
0vINTR
Failing
How Interlay Governance Works.
Call
Metadata
Timeline1
Votes Bubble
Comments