Back to Blog

Lead in: DeFi Risk Mitigation Guide

July 8, 2024
2 min read

In the "DeFi Risk Mitigation Guide" series, various security issues within the DeFi are explored. The articles include types of risks users encounter, methods to assess these risks, safety recommendations for users, and security practices for project teams. The series of articles offering users and developers a comprehensive understanding to improve security and efficiency in the DeFi.

This series of articles, excerpted from the Latest Escape Strategy (https://www.okx.com/zh-hans/learn/security-special-issue-5)co-curated by OKX Web3 and BlockSec, addresses the security concerns faced by DeFi users and DeFi project teams.

Breaking Down: A Comprehensive Overview

DeFi Risk Mitigation Guide 01 : Identifying Types of Risks DeFi Users Face

DeFi users face various risks such as smart contract vulnerabilities, phishing attacks, rug pulls, and market volatility. Understanding these risks is crucial for safeguarding assets.

DeFi Risk Mitigation Guide 02 : How DeFi Users Can Assess Risks and Avoid Losses

In this article, Users will learn to read and understand audit reports, research the project's team and history, analyze liquidity and tokenomics, and stay updated with the latest security practices to effectively assess risks in DeFi projects.

DeFiRisk Mitigation Guide 03 : Safety Tips for DeFi Users

In this article, we introduce personal security measures such as using hardware wallets, enabling two-factor authentication, regularly updating passwords, and avoiding suspicious links or downloads can help users protect their assets in the DeFi space.

DeFi Risk Mitigation Guide 04 : Security Practices for DeFi Project Teams

DeFi project teams should conduct thorough audits, implement multi-signature wallets, establish bug bounty programs, and engage with the community transparently to ensure a secure and trustworthy environment for users.

Sign up for the latest updates
~$4.72M Lost: TAC, Transit Finance & More | BlockSec Weekly
Security Insights

~$4.72M Lost: TAC, Transit Finance & More | BlockSec Weekly

This BlockSec weekly security report covers 3 notable attack incidents identified between May 11 and May 17, 2026, across TRON, TON, and Ethereum, with total estimated losses of approximately $4.72M. Three incidents are analyzed in detail: the highlighted $1.88M Transit Finance exploit on TRON, where a deprecated swap bridge contract with lingering token approvals was exploited through arbitrary calldata forwarding; the $2.8M TAC TON-to-EVM bridge exploit caused by missing canonical wallet verification in the jetton deposit flow; and the $46.75K Boost Hook exploit on Ethereum, where spot price manipulation on a Uniswap V4 hook-based perpetual protocol forced the protocol to buy tokens at inflated prices using its own reserves.

~$15.9M Lost: Trusted Volumes, Wasabi & More | BlockSec Weekly
Security Insights

~$15.9M Lost: Trusted Volumes, Wasabi & More | BlockSec Weekly

This BlockSec bi-weekly security report covers 11 notable attack incidents identified between April 27 and May 10, 2026, across Sui, Ethereum, BNB Chain, Base, Blast, and Berachain, with total estimated losses of approximately $15.9M. Three incidents are analyzed in detail: the highlighted $1.14M Aftermath Finance exploit on Sui, where a signed/unsigned semantic mismatch in the builder-fee validation allowed an attacker to inject a negative fee that was converted into positive collateral during settlement; the $5.87M Trusted Volumes RFQ authorization mismatch on Ethereum; and the $5.7M Wasabi Protocol infrastructure-to-contract-control compromise across multiple EVM chains.

Newsletter - April 2026
Security Insights

Newsletter - April 2026

In April 2026, the DeFi ecosystem experienced three major security incidents. KelpDAO lost ~$290M due to an insecure 1-of-1 DVN bridge configuration exploited via RPC infrastructure compromise, Drift Protocol suffered ~$285M from a multisig governance takeover leveraging Solana's durable nonce mechanism, and Rhea Finance incurred ~$18.4M following a business logic flaw in its margin-trading module that allowed circular swap path manipulatio