Toutes les vulnérabilités
HIGHWeb3curated

WEB3-CURVE-DNS-2025

Web3 · Ethereum · Curve Finance (curve.fi frontend)

Résumé

On May 12, 2025, attackers hijacked Curve Finance's primary domain, curve.fi, at the registrar and DNS level and pointed visitors at a wallet-draining clone of the site. Curve's smart contracts and on-chain funds were never touched; this was a Web2 attack on the domain, the soft underbelly that no Solidity audit can protect. The nameservers for curve.fi were swapped to attacker-controlled infrastructure at the registrar (iwantmyname, the same registrar implicated in Curve's 2022 hijack), and the clone prompted users to approve malicious token transactions. On-chain analysts estimated user losses around $520,000, most of it taken in the first ninety minutes. Curve repointed the domain to neutral nameservers, then permanently migrated to curve.finance and signaled a move toward decentralized (ENS) hosting.

Comment le corriger

  • Immediately repoint the domain to neutral nameservers to stop serving the malicious clone, then force-rotate registrar credentials and audit the account for rogue contacts or pending transfers.
  • Push warnings through every channel and coordinate with wallet and security vendors (Blockaid, Phantom) to blocklist the malicious domain.
  • Tell users to revoke any token approvals granted while the clone was live (revoke.cash or an explorer's approvals view).
  • Migrate to a clean, locked domain if the original cannot be quickly and safely recovered, as Curve did with curve.finance.

Comment l’éviter dans votre code

  • Lock the domain at the registrar and registry (clientTransferProhibited and registry lock), enable DNSSEC, and require hardware-key (FIDO2) 2FA on registrar, DNS, CDN, and email accounts.
  • Choose a registrar that supports change notifications and anti-social-engineering controls; Curve's repeat hits through the same registrar show registrar choice is a real risk variable.
  • Serve the dApp from content-addressed hosting (ENS plus IPFS) so the canonical entry point does not depend on one mutable DNS record.
  • Monitor DNS records and certificate-transparency logs for unexpected changes; the protocols that survived these waves caught the takeover through monitoring.
  • On the user side, verify spender contract addresses, bookmark canonical URLs, and use hardware wallets with clear-signing so a malicious approval cannot be blind-signed.

Détails de l’avis

How it happened

A frontend hijack leaves the on-chain protocol intact but replaces the website users actually visit. The attacker gained control of Curve's domain at the registrar level and altered its DNS delegation, swapping the Cloudflare nameservers to ones they controlled. Curve's founder Michael Egorov said the registrar effectively transferred control without any email notification, and that Curve saw no sign of a compromise of its own login credentials, pointing to a registrar-side failure rather than a phish of Curve's account (the precise root cause was still under investigation). The cloned site was a near-static decoy: it did not work as a real interface, it simply asked visitors to connect a wallet and sign token approvals and transfers that routed funds to the attacker, the classic approval-phishing drain run by a wallet drainer.

The damage

On-chain investigators (notably rotki's Lefteris Karapetsas) traced roughly $520,000 moved by the attacker within about ninety minutes, around $500,000 as ETH plus about $20,000 in other tokens; several outlets reported the incident without any official figure, so treat the number as a best on-chain estimate rather than a Curve-confirmed total. The losses came from individual users who interacted with the clone during the redirect window; Curve's treasury and protocol funds were unaffected. Curve, plus security firms Blockaid and Cyvers and wallets like Phantom, warned users and blocklisted the malicious domain, which limited the exposure window even though the early minutes were the costly ones.

A repeat, not a one-off

This was Curve's second domain hijack. In August 2022, curve.fi was DNS-hijacked through a compromised nameserver and drained about $570,000, also tied to the registrar iwantmyname. It also came during a bad week: on May 5, 2025, Curve's X account was separately compromised to push a fake airdrop link. None of this is unique to Curve; it is the dominant way DeFi frontends get attacked, because the contracts are hard targets while the Web2 domain is a single mutable record. The same pattern has hit CoW Swap, Compound, Ambient, KyberSwap, and others, catalogued in Stateward's DeFi frontend and DNS hijack overview. Note this is entirely distinct from the 2023 Curve Vyper reentrancy hack, which was a roughly $70 million smart-contract bug, not a DNS event.

Why it matters

The protocol can be flawless and users still lose money if the front door is a single DNS record at a registrar with weak controls. The fix is twofold. Operators must harden the registrar (registry transfer lock, DNSSEC, hardware-key 2FA) and ideally serve the interface from content-addressed hosting (ENS plus IPFS) so the entry point is not one mutable record, which is exactly why Curve moved to curve.finance and toward ENS. Users must learn to verify the contract they are signing rather than trusting the UI, and rely on hardware wallets with clear-signing and transaction simulation so a blind approval cannot silently grant an unlimited allowance.

Références

Vulnérabilités liées

Tout Web3 →