Get the Crypto Payment Security & Compliance Playbook
Back to Blog

BlockSec Has Closed the Seed Funding Raising

December 28, 2021
1 min read

We are glad to announce that BlockSec has closed the seed funding raising that was led by Fenbushi Capital, with participation from A&T Capital, Qulian, Impossible Finance, Incuba Alpha and NEAR MetaWeb Ventures.

Founded in 2021, BlockSec has served over 50 clients and has protected over thousands of millions worth of digital assets in this year. It has the online transaction virtualization system for both BSC and Ethereum (https://tx.blocksecteam.com) and Flash Loan monitoring system (https://versatile.blocksecteam.com/flashloan) for both Ethereum and Cronos.

The BlockSec Team focuses on the security of the blockchain ecosystem, and collaborates with leading DeFi projects to secure their products. The team is founded by top-notch security researchers and experienced experts from both academia and industry. They have published multiple blockchain security papers in prestigious conferences, reported several zero-day attacks of DeFi applications, and released detailed analysis reports of high impact security incidents.

Sign up for the latest updates
~$9.4M Lost: Injective, Aquifer Exploits | BlockSec Weekly
Security Insights

~$9.4M Lost: Injective, Aquifer Exploits | BlockSec Weekly

During the past week (2026/08/31 - 2026/09/06), four security incidents caused approximately $9.4M in losses across Injective, Solana, Ethereum, and Flow EVM. The largest was the Injective exploit, where an insurance fund identifier collided with a binary options market identifier and the settlement path never compared their denominations, draining about $4.8M; Aquifer on Solana lost about $2.47M because its swap path invoked an unvalidated caller-supplied Token Program, and Notional Finance V1 on Ethereum lost about $1.73M to an unchecked `uint128` cast that valued a debt at zero. Ankr FLOW on Flow EVM closed out the week with about $410K drained through a staking entry point that skipped its pause guard and minted against a stale ratio.

From Incidents to Regulation: Why Crypto Institutions Need Blockchain Penetration Testing
Security Services

From Incidents to Regulation: Why Crypto Institutions Need Blockchain Penetration Testing

Exchanges, payment firms, custodians, and wallet providers now lose the most money beyond the smart contract—in signing, custody, keys, people, and supply chains. Code-level audit and transaction-level monitoring each leave a gap, and traditional penetration tests may miss crypto's signing and fund semantics. This article opens our blockchain penetration testing series with the two legs of the case for institutions in scope: where the risk actually comes from, and how NYDFS, DORA, VARA, SFC, and MAS treat adversarial testing across five jurisdictions.

What Is Blockchain Penetration Testing? Definitions and Boundaries
Security Services

What Is Blockchain Penetration Testing? Definitions and Boundaries

No widely accepted definition of blockchain penetration testing exists, and many proposed ones tangle it with audit, scanning, and bug bounty. This article sets out a working definition—an adversarial, hands-on assessment of a running system, under agreed scope and rules of engagement, that validates exploitable paths and control chains—and what web3 adds: a money-handling threat model whose defining composition gap is the off-chain-to-on-chain handoff. It then maps the five testable capabilities of that chain and routes nearby objectives to code audit, wallet security audit, web3 security testing, scanning, and bug bounty.