NewsCryptoAFX-Operated Cross-Chain Bridge Drained of $24.15M USDC in Suspected Exploit, Blockaid Reports

AFX-Operated Cross-Chain Bridge Drained of $24.15M USDC in Suspected Exploit, Blockaid Reports

Author: AI Crypto Core·

Key Takeaways

  • AFX's cross-chain bridge was exploited for roughly $24.15 million in USDC, as identified by blockchain security firm Blockaid.
  • The incident was classified as a targeted attack on bridge infrastructure rather than routine user withdrawals or market outflows.
  • Specific details including the attack vector, affected blockchain networks, attacker identity, and fund recovery status had not been confirmed at the time of initial reporting.
  • Cross-chain bridges remain high-risk targets due to their concentration of pooled assets from multiple blockchains within a single infrastructure layer.
  • Users who interacted with the affected bridge are advised to monitor official communications from AFX and Blockaid for verified updates.
AFX-Operated Cross-Chain Bridge Drained of $24.15M USDC in Suspected Exploit, Blockaid Reports

A cross-chain bridge operated by AFX, an Arbitrum ecosystem protocol, was exploited for approximately $24.15 million in USDC, according to blockchain security firm Blockaid. The firm flagged the incident as a targeted attack on the bridge infrastructure rather than routine market activity or normal capital outflows.

Details of the Incident

The loss originates from AFX's cross-chain bridge — the infrastructure used to transfer assets between different blockchains. According to Blockaid's statement on X, the attack drained roughly $24.15 million worth of USDC from the protocol. The incident was first reported by KuCoin's news service, which described the event as a hack.

Because the event is classified as an exploit, the funds were extracted through a deliberate attack on the bridge's infrastructure rather than withdrawn by users under normal conditions. This distinction points to a security failure in the protocol.

As of the initial reporting, specific details — including the exact attack vector, the affected blockchain networks, the identity of the attacker, and any potential recovery of funds — had not been confirmed. The account is based on what Blockaid and the initial flash reports described.

Why Bridge Exploits Remain a Persistent Threat

Cross-chain bridges are among the most heavily scrutinized components in cryptocurrency security. They concentrate large pools of assets from multiple blockchains within a single piece of infrastructure, making them attractive targets for attackers. An exploit against this layer can expose funds that users believed were securely in transit between networks.

Bridge vulnerabilities have produced some of the largest losses in cryptocurrency history, including the Ronin Network hack that drained roughly $625 million in March 2022 and the Wormhole bridge exploit that resulted in approximately $320 million in losses the same year. These incidents prompted broader industry adoption of formal bridge audits, real-time monitoring tools, and multisig validation — measures that have reduced but not eliminated the risk surface.

The loss is denominated in USDC, one of the largest stablecoins by market capitalization, making the dollar value of the incident straightforward to assess. A similar pattern of concentrated value being drained emerged in a separate recent incident, when Balance Coin collapsed following an oracle pricing exploit.

Monitoring and Regulatory Context

Users who may have interacted with the affected bridge are advised to monitor official channels from AFX and Blockaid for confirmed updates and to check whether their personal wallet activity involved the compromised infrastructure. The involvement of a named security firm provides a monitoring avenue that may yield further verified details as the investigation progresses.

The incident also contributes to ongoing scrutiny of cross-chain infrastructure as a risk area. Regulators have increasingly examined the trust assumptions underlying these systems, alongside broader debates over how on-chain vaults and lending activities are treated under securities law.

Source: AI Crypto Core