MathMatheus

Wait so $NEAR is getting FUD for stopping hackers from laundering funds stolen from Bitget? somehow NEAR is not actually decentralized. Context: - Bitget suffers a massive wallet breach on September 24. - $387.5M in affected funds. - they try NEAR Intents to launder the money According to NEAR's report: $50M in suspected hacker-related flows attempted to use NEAR Intents - $166K made it through - $503K was stopped during execution most of the remaining attempts were rejected before the swaps could be completed NEAR publishes its report explaining how SHIELD, its risk-monitoring system, identified the suspicious activity. Its position is pretty clear: “Permissionless doesn't mean neutral.” NEAR Intents, NEAR’s base blockchain and Confidential Intents are three different things. - SHIELD operates at the Intents execution layer. It can refuse to quote a swap, reject suspicious flows or stop funds already inside an unfinished execution. It cannot freeze someone’s entire Ethereum wallet or reverse transactions across every blockchain. NEAR has been pushing Confidential Intents, which allows financial activity to be executed privately, with selective disclosure and risk screening. That’s a very different privacy model from Monero or Zcash. claiming NEAR can suddenly freeze every wallet on its blockchain because Intents rejected stolen funds is a pretty wild misunderstanding of the architecture. What an industry. IMO this is not a reason to FUD $NEAR