Arbitrum Security Council Member Slams Circle Over Inaction on North Korea Hack Funds - Blockonomi
by Brenda Mary · BlockonomiTLDR:
Table of Contents
- TLDR:
- Arbitrum Council Steps In After Kelp DAO Hack
- Circle’s Inaction Draws Sharp Criticism From Green
- Arbitrum nine-of-twelve Security Council used emergency powers to freeze $72M in stolen Kelp DAO funds.
- Griff Green accused Circle of prioritizing profits over action, calling it “clearly not full of good men.”
- Tether actively froze North Korean hacker wallets, contrasting sharply with Circle’s reported inaction on stolen funds.
- Green proposed community-led USDC sell-offs as leverage to push stablecoin issuers toward stronger anti-hack measures.
Arbitrum Security Council member Griff Green has openly criticized Circle, the issuer of USDC, for its perceived inaction against hacker threats.
Green contrasted Circle’s response with Tether’s proactive freezing of North Korean funds. The criticism came in the wake of the Kelp DAO hack, which drained approximately $72 million from Aave.
Green suggested the community may need to sell USDC to pressure these institutions into action.
Arbitrum Council Steps In After Kelp DAO Hack
The Kelp DAO hack targeted Aave and resulted in roughly $72 million being stolen by North Korean actors. The attackers used the stolen funds as collateral on Aave to borrow Ether. They left the funds sitting in their wallets for several days, giving responders a window to act.
Green, who also played a role in the original Ethereum DAO hack recovery, helped coordinate the Arbitrum response.
The Arbitrum Security Council, a nine-of-twelve multi-signature group, used emergency powers to freeze the stolen funds.
Green described the move as necessary, stating that the situation posed an “existential risk to DeFi” from state-sponsored actors.
Green clarified that blockchain technology is not inherently immutable. He noted it operates on social consensus, which allows intervention when a strong majority agrees. Without that consensus-driven action, he argued, DeFi would remain vulnerable to coordinated state-level attacks.
Tools like the Seal 911 bot made coordination far easier than during the early days of crypto. Green noted that North Korea has shifted tactics, now targeting “people and keys rather than smart contract code.” This change in approach calls for stronger operational security across the entire DeFi space.
Circle’s Inaction Draws Sharp Criticism From Green
Green did not hold back when addressing Circle’s response to the hack. He stated plainly that Circle is “clearly not full of good men,” drawing a sharp contrast with Tether’s active role in freezing hacker funds. He argued that Tether’s team, rooted in traditional crypto culture, still holds early crypto principles close.
Circle, backed by Goldman Sachs, drew criticism for prioritizing profitability over community protection. Green suggested that the community “might need to sell off USDC to force these institutions to take action.” He framed this as a potential pressure strategy rather than an outright rejection of the stablecoin.
The recovered funds from the Kelp DAO hack will be put to a vote within the Arbitrum DAO. Green also introduced the DAO Security Fund, a new initiative aimed at strengthening Ethereum’s overall security. The fund focuses on project discovery and security funding, with a new round opening soon.
Green wrapped up by noting the deeply political nature of blockchain governance. Making crypto safe for everyday users remains an ongoing challenge for the community. The debate over stablecoin issuers’ responsibilities is likely to continue as DeFi grows.