#加密钱包安全风险 Seeing this Trust Wallet incident, what I feel isn't surprise but a familiar sense of helplessness. The $6 million theft scale looks shocking, but what's truly chilling is Slow Mist's assessment—developer devices or code repositories may have already been compromised. This means the problem isn't in the wallet's algorithm design itself, but upstream in the entire supply chain.

This reminds me of the 2016 The DAO incident, and later various exchange theft cases. Each time we thought we'd found the root cause and strengthened defenses at certain points, but hackers always find an unexpected workaround. From contract vulnerabilities to private key management, and now to development environment penetration, the evolution path of security threats is actually quite clear—when one defense line becomes strong enough, attacks bypass it and strike directly at the source.

This Trust Wallet incident is especially heartbreaking because it serves a massive user base, and many people treated it as a "relatively safe" choice. But safety has never had an absolute form. Those investors who experienced major ups and downs in 2017 and 2021 should understand this principle—no matter how large the project or how renowned the application, none can escape the dual test of human nature and technology.

Now the question before us is: what can we still trust? Cold wallets? But they still need to connect to the network during use. Self-custody? But most people lack sufficient security awareness. Exchanges? History has already proven centralization isn't the answer either. Perhaps the only conclusion is: there is no perfect solution, only continuous vigilance and regular risk assessments. This industry works exactly this way—every security incident is reminding us with real money that the cost of security awareness is far lower than the loss from being attacked.