One of the biggest blockchain arguments is to play a prank on Juno developers. It should be noted that once the transaction data has been processed, the transaction is final and immutable. In the event of an error in the sale price or in the purpose of the money, it is practically impossible to withdraw, except in the case of an amicable agreement with the recipient.
And this unfortunate scenario has just hit the Juno developers, who, at the urging of the community, decided to seize the equivalent of $36 million from an investor who received the tokens fraudulently.
The transfer manager, unfortunately, changed the address of the destination wallet (which was supposed to act as a buffer, waiting for investors to decide the fate of these 3 million tokens) with a hash number. As a result, the funds were transferred to an inaccessible address.
Theoretically, such an error should not occur. Unlike a Bitcoin or Ethereum transaction, which is Proof-of-Work, which requires long computational processes (which consume a lot of power), Juno is based on Proof-of-Work.
Concretely, the transaction is verified and confirmed by token holders. This is theoretically a more efficient method (less energy intensive), but it has just shown one of its limits. After all, despite the 125 “validators” who worked on this transaction, not one of them noticed the error.
Recovery should be possible
The advantage of the Proof-of-Stake chain is that these kinds of errors can be corrected. Indeed, being under the control of the token holders, it is possible to change the blockchain by a majority vote and therefore redirect the funds to the correct address with the update.
Such a maneuver would not be possible with the Proof-of-Work chain, unless you create a full fork of the chain, as was the case in 2016 with Ethereum after the $50 million theft, and for all holders to accept it (which has not been the case since then). , as some continued to exploit the original: Ethereum Classic).
CNET.com article adapted by CNETFrance