Bitget و Liquid Incident ها هک های کریپتو Q3 را به 1.2 میلیارد دلار سوق می دهند

Crypto hacks hit $1.18 billion across 107 recorded incidents in the third quarter of 2026, according to a report from security firm Hacken. The quarter stands out as the most damaging period for crypto security since Q1 2025, when the Bybit incident attributed to North Korea contributed to total hack losses of $1.6 billion, as referenced by Hacken’s later summaries. While the total figure is stark, Hacken also documented meaningful recoveries. Roughly $387 million of the $1.18 billion was returned or reversed after the attacks—about 33% of gross losses—highlighting both the scale of harm and how quickly parts of the industry can unwind damage when interventions happen. Key takeaways Q3 2026 losses reached $1.18 billion across 107 incidents, the worst quarter since Q1 2025. Supplier and tooling weaknesses drove most stolen value: 77% (about $906 million) stemmed from compromised external components and similar gaps outside standard security reviews. Smart contract exploits were the most frequent attack type, tied to $228 million losses across 71 incidents. About a third of losses were recovered: $387 million was returned or reversed after Q3 hacks, while $384 million (32%) remained unrecovered. Most incidents were smaller: 98 of 107 losses were under $10 million; the median loss was $670,000. Big-number losses, with a concentrated set of incidents Hacken’s Q3 assessment shows that the distribution of damage was uneven. Four incidents accounted for the majority of total losses, while the remaining cases were far smaller on average. Specifically, 80% of the quarter’s stolen value was concentrated in the top four events. The largest incidents included: $387 million tied to the Bitget hack $320 million linked to the Liquid Network exploit $120 million associated with the Tectonic exploit $115 million estimated losses related to a Coldcard firmware vulnerability At the other end of the scale, 98 of the 107 recorded incidents involved losses below $10 million. Hacken reported a median loss of $670,000, reinforcing that while the worst-case headlines dominate attention, many breaches involved lower—yet still significant—amounts. Why Q3’s losses were driven by “outside the audit” risk A central theme in Hacken’s findings is that much of the quarter’s value loss did not come from classic smart contract bugs alone. The report attributes 77% of Q3 stolen value—about $906 million—to issues such as compromised suppliers or developer tools, publicly disclosed fixes that had not been deployed, and other components that may sit outside security review boundaries. That breakdown matters for investors, users, and protocol teams because it shifts attention from only code-level security to the broader development and operations ecosystem. If compromise or weakness originates in third-party tooling, dependency chains, privileged infrastructure, or external components, then even teams with strong internal practices may still be exposed.