CoinTelegraph
NEAR Intents says its SHIELD system rejected more than $50 million in funds linked to the Bitget hack and froze $503,000 during a transaction. The figures describe blocked or frozen funds, not confirmed recovery.
Why it matters
The incident puts transaction security in focus: screening and intervention at the point of transfer can disrupt attempts to move funds associated with a hack. NEAR Intents' claim offers a concrete example of that approach in use.
Market impact
For crypto users and platforms, the reported action is a positive signal for security tooling, but it does not erase the losses from the hack or confirm the status of the funds. The key distinction is whether blocked funds can ultimately be recovered.
Frequently asked questions
-
How much in Bitget hack funds did NEAR Intents say SHIELD rejected?
NEAR Intents said SHIELD rejected more than $50 million in funds linked to the Bitget hack.
-
How much did SHIELD freeze during a transaction?
NEAR Intents said SHIELD froze $503,000 mid-transaction.
-
Does blocking the funds mean they were recovered?
No. The reported figures describe funds rejected or frozen, and do not confirm that the money was recovered or returned.
-
What security approach does the SHIELD incident demonstrate?
It demonstrates transaction-level intervention, in which screening can interrupt the movement of funds associated with a hack.
-
What remains unclear about the reported funds?
The ultimate status of the rejected and frozen funds is not confirmed by the reported figures.
WuBlockchain
CryptoSlate
TheBlock
CoinDesk
Lookonchain