Binance Supports Zilliqa EVM Migration for ZIL
Binance will migrate users’ Zilliqa (ZIL) holdings from the legacy Zilliqa network to Zilliqa EVM at a 1:1 ratio. The exchange will manage the technical process, while ZIL spot, margin, futures and Binance Earn products will remain available.
ZIL deposits and withdrawals through the legacy network have been suspended since 5 August. After the migration, Binance will reopen deposits and withdrawals through Zilliqa EVM without a separate announcement. The old network will no longer be supported.
The Binance migration follows a security incident involving Zilliqa’s Ledger application. A flaw in Schnorr nonce generation weakened private-key security for legacy, non-EVM transactions. Zilliqa confirmed that at least 683.13 million ZIL were stolen across 66 transactions, while 6,772 accounts were exposed and 51 were drained.
Zilliqa has disabled legacy transactions and is retiring the old system because previously exposed keys cannot be secured retroactively. Self-custody users will use a separate zero-knowledge-proof migration tool to transfer balances to EVM addresses without sharing seed phrases or private keys.
For traders, the Zilliqa EVM migration should reduce future infrastructure risk, but the theft and uncertainty around compensation remain negative sentiment factors. ZIL liquidity and access may be temporarily affected during exchange migrations, although Binance trading is expected to continue normally.
Neutral
The immediate market impact is likely neutral. Binance will continue supporting ZIL trading, and the migration is being conducted at a 1:1 ratio. This limits the risk of forced selling or a sudden reduction in exchange liquidity. Similar exchange-led network migrations have often produced short-term volatility around deposit and withdrawal suspensions, but they have not necessarily changed the underlying token value.
The security incident is a negative factor. At least 683.13 million ZIL were stolen, and thousands of accounts were exposed. Traders may price in reputational damage, potential compensation-related token issuance and uncertainty over recovered funds. These concerns could increase selling pressure and widen spreads, particularly if other exchanges announce additional migration restrictions.
Over the longer term, retiring the vulnerable legacy system and making Zilliqa EVM the sole production environment could improve network security, developer compatibility and operational reliability. However, the bullish effect depends on successful migration execution, restored withdrawal access and evidence that the stolen assets and affected holders are being addressed. Until those issues become clearer, the operational benefits largely offset, rather than outweigh, the security-related risks.