Magic Eden co-founder responds to the breach: Platform not compromised, protocol...

On September 25, Magic Eden co-founder and CEO Jack publicly clarified on the X platform that Magic Eden was not attacked. The security incident actually involved Limit Break's transaction agreement with smart contract , which had been discontinued by Magic Eden two years earlier.

At the heart of it all: The problem is a discontinued third-party protocol

According to Jack, the vulnerability does not occur on Magic Eden 's own platform, but instead refers to a trading protocol developed by Limit Break with smart contract . The relationship between Magic Eden and Limit Break dates back to an early stage of integration of trading functionality in NFT , which was abandoned two years ago by Magic Eden . This means that the current operating environment for Magic Eden is not dependent on this protocol.

In his tweet, Jack specifically thanked White Hat hacker 0xQuit for participating in the rescue and promised to post more progress.

What users need to do now

For users who have used the relevant functionality on Magic Eden , Jack gives a clear instruction: revoke authorization on Magic Eden according to official instructions. This operation is part of the standard action kit for on-chain security even if a protocol has been disabled by the platform, and as long as the user's wallet still retains the license to this agreement contract, there is a theoretical risk of being called leaked contracts. The revocation can be done through the on-chain -tool.

Why This Matters

Security incidents in NFT trading platforms have historically affected the security of users' assets. The key to this incident is the boundary of responsibility: vulnerabilities are found in third-party protocols, but user authorization acts occurred within the interaction process of Magic Eden . This exposes an industry-wide problem that after integrating external protocols into a trading platform and subsequently shutting it down, remaining user end authorizations can still be an attack surface.

For Magic Eden the decision to disable this protocol two years ago objectively mitigated the immediate impact of this incident. However, how to push Limit Break to suspend asset transfers at a protocol level and ensure that user authorization clearance is in place remains an issue for follow-up.

Follow-up focus

Magic Eden The results of negotiations with Limit Break, whether to implement an asset transfer suspension at the protocol level and specific operational guidelines for officially revoking authorization will be noteworthy updates in the coming hours. Until further official information is provided, users can check their own wallet status related to this agreement by themselves.