Bridge Hacks: 14 Protocols Drained $340.7M in May
Bridge hacks remained a major threat in May, with PeckShieldAlert reporting 14 significant bridge exploits across the cross-chain ecosystem.
The attacks reportedly cost hackers $340.7 million in May, draining cross-chain protocols. Two of the biggest incidents exceeded $10 million: the Verus–Ethereum Bridge attack ($11.4M) and the THORChain exploit ($10M). Other large losses included Gravity Bridge ($5.4M) and the IoTeX.io Bridge ($8.8M).
The report highlights a recurring weakness in interoperability designs. Many bridges rely on message passing between chains, plus validators/relayers and smart contracts that hold large asset balances. Compared with single-chain apps, this adds complexity and expands the attack surface—fueling repeated bridge hacks.
Broader context: losses rose after a contained Q1 total of about $169M, reaching nearly $770M year-to-date. April still looks worst in scale: nearly 30 incidents totaling over $600M. The largest event in the dataset was the KelpDAO/LayerZero exploit on April 18, with losses around $292M. DeFiLlama data also shows April had the highest total value compromised at $634.85M, while May totaled $60.03M.
The article argues there is no single fix, but suggests architectural and operational upgrades: decentralized validation, cryptographic verification, thorough audits, and tighter risk controls. It also stresses reducing funds held in bridge contracts and minimizing trust between linked trust domains.
For traders, the key takeaway is that bridge hacks are not a one-off issue; they represent persistent protocol risk that can trigger sudden token volatility around affected ecosystems.
Bearish
This news is bearish because it reinforces that bridge hacks are ongoing and financially material, not isolated incidents. May’s reported $340.7M loss across 14 protocols—plus the much larger April damage—signals persistent systemic risk in cross-chain infrastructure. Historically, such exploit clusters tend to cause short-term selloffs in affected ecosystems (token liquidity drains, trust declines, and risk premiums rise), even when broader market indicators are stable.
In the short term, traders may see heightened volatility around tokens tied to compromised bridge ecosystems (e.g., ETH-adjacent or other impacted cross-chain assets) and may rotate toward safer venues or reduced exposure to bridge-dependent DeFi. In the long term, repeated failures can push investors toward projects with stronger audits, more conservative bridge custody, and clearer formal verification—potentially rewarding security-focused teams while pressuring weaker interoperability designs.
Overall, the market impact skews negative: the threat is clear, the losses are large, and the issue is structural, which typically sustains a risk-off sentiment in cross-chain DeFi.