GMX Token Rises 14% After Hacker Begins $40 Million Return
- GMX Recovers After Attack and Partial Return of Funds
- Explorer accepts $5 million reward from project
- Exploration affected only Arbitrum's GLP V1 pool
The GMX token surged 14% after the person responsible for exploiting a $40 million exploit on the decentralized protocol began returning the funds. The surge comes after the project offered the hacker a $5 million reward as an incentive for voluntary repayment.
The breach affected GMX's GLP V1 liquidity pool on the Arbitrum network, resulting in the withdrawal of over $40 million worth of cryptocurrencies such as USDC, FRAX, WBTC, and WETH. As an immediate measure, GMX temporarily suspended trading and issuance of the V1 pool on both Arbitrum and Avalanche. The V2 version and the GMX token were not affected.
The GMX team published an on-chain proposal offering the attacker 10% of the exploited value as a reward for identifying the flaw, with a promise to not take legal action if the funds were returned within 48 hours. In response, the exploiter sent the message "ok, funds will be returned later," as recorded by PeckShield.
#PeckShieldAlert #GMX Exploiter msg: funds will be returned later pic.twitter.com/ohlOVYWSvD
—PeckShieldAlert (@PeckShieldAlert) July 11, 2025
Hours later, two deposits were made: one with 5,5 million FRAX and the other with 5 million FRAX, totaling $10,5 million returned to date. Additionally, approximately 10.000 ETH—equivalent to $30 million—was sent back in four separate transactions, according to PeckShield's tracking.
The price of the GMX token, which had fallen 28% after the attack, hitting a low of $10,45, quickly recovered, reaching $13,25 on Friday after the initial refunds.
According to the team's post-incident analysis, the vulnerability was identified in the OrderBook contract, where a reentrancy flaw allowed the exploiter to manipulate the average price of BTC short positions. This inflated the value of the GLP token, allowing for redemptions with undue profits. The team acted quickly to contain the impact, shutting down critical functions and coordinating the tracking of the stolen assets with specialized partners.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
Fear is the biggest short! Morgan Stanley calls for bottom-fishing in semiconductors: land and electricity shortages are not a problem, approved projects can't meet demand
Morgan Stanley believes that the recent sell-off in the semiconductor sector has been excessive, and that market panic rather than fundamentals is the biggest risk. Driven by demand for AI infrastructure, downstream orders continue to accelerate, with semiconductor supply remaining the core bottleneck. LPS constraints actually make growth more stable. The sector may fluctuate within a range in the short term and is currently near the bottom; prospects for the computing power and storage subsectors are favorable.

Indian Rupee extends rally amid continued FIIs buying, lower oil prices

Hashrate orders are booming, why is "AI trading" falling out of favor? JPMorgan reveals the time lag between AI investment and productivity realization
Joseph Lupton from the JP Morgan Global Economic Research Team pointed out in a research report on November 10 that recent improvements in labor productivity have been driven more by capital deepening and increased intensity of factor utilization. The broad efficiency gains from AI, resulting from process reconstruction, data integration, and organizational adjustments, will still take time to materialize. This means orders for chips, servers, and electrical equipment may grow first, but continuous investment returns for computing power operators and end users may not arrive at the same pace.
AI investment enters the "Trough of Disillusionment", the next 18 months will be a life-or-death test!
Goldman Sachs believes that the AI investment cycle is currently in the "trough of disillusionment," but this is not the first time. The core contradiction lies in the fact that the business models of new cloud computing providers are highly dependent on end-user returns from AI spending, while currently "there are basically zero companies that can attribute profits to AI." Social Capital founder Palihapitiya has clearly defined an 18-month key window, during which the market will decide which AI business models are sustainable and which are not.

