Another Arbitrum Protocol Hit by Exploit
Futureswap, a decentralized leverage trading platform on Arbitrum, appears to have lost around $395,000 in what security researchers are calling a suspected exploit. The incident was detected by blockchain security firm BlockSec’s threat detection platform, Phalcon, which noticed suspicious transactions targeting the protocol’s contract.
According to BlockSec’s analysis, the attacker drained funds through multiple changePosition operations, eventually withdrawing a large amount of USDC. What’s concerning is that the contract isn’t open-sourced, which makes pinpointing the exact root cause more difficult. The security firm mentioned they tried to contact the Futureswap team but hadn’t received any response at the time of their report. Looking at the project’s social media presence, their X account hasn’t posted since 2022, which perhaps suggests the project wasn’t actively maintained.
A Troubling Pattern Emerges
This isn’t an isolated incident for Arbitrum-based protocols in early 2026. Actually, it’s the third major exploit on the network in just the first ten days of the year. Earlier this month, two other Arbitrum projects—USD Gambit and TLP—lost about $1.5 million combined in smart contract access attacks. Those breaches happened when an attacker gained admin access and replaced legitimate contracts with malicious versions.
Security researchers have noticed something interesting about these attacks. They seem to follow a pattern that’s been linked to North Korean state-sponsored hackers. These groups typically use mixers like Tornado Cash to launder stolen funds, and they’ve gotten quite good at moving quickly to swap and mix assets almost immediately after an exploit. This makes it harder to track the funds or implement address blacklisting.
Why Arbitrum Keeps Getting Targeted
There might be a few reasons why Arbitrum protocols are seeing so much attention from exploiters. For one, the network holds over $3 billion across various DeFi protocols, according to Defillama data. That’s a lot of liquidity, and attackers naturally gravitate toward ecosystems where they can maximize their potential haul.
Another pattern I’ve noticed is that many of these recent hacks target older smart contracts that still hold liquidity. These might be projects that launched during previous bull markets but didn’t maintain active development or security oversight. USD Gambit, for instance, was reportedly being phased out in the coming weeks despite launching in 2023.
The Broader Security Landscape
It’s worth mentioning that the Arbitrum Foundation actually rolled out a $14 million war chest in July 2025 through their Audit Program. The idea was to subsidize smart contract audits for native projects. But perhaps the timing or implementation hasn’t been enough to prevent these recent incidents.
Meanwhile, Tornado Cash deposits spiked in the fourth quarter of 2025, with the mixer now holding a record value locked from both new hacks and older exploits. The platform contains more than 338,000 ETH, which exceeds its 2021 peak. Other mixers like Railgun have also seen increased activity.
What strikes me is how these attacks often target relatively obscure projects. They’re not going after the biggest names with the most sophisticated security teams. Instead, they’re finding protocols that might have launched with good intentions but didn’t maintain proper security practices over time. It’s a reminder that in DeFi, security isn’t a one-time thing—it requires ongoing attention and maintenance.
BlockSec’s analysis suggests the Futureswap exploit might be related to unexpected stableBalance accounting changes during earlier position updates. These changes apparently allowed USDC to be released when removing collateral. Without access to the contract’s source code, though, researchers can only speculate about the exact mechanism.
The broader concern here is that these incidents could erode trust in the Arbitrum ecosystem at a time when layer-2 solutions are competing fiercely for users and developers. Each exploit makes users more cautious about where they deploy their funds, and developers more hesitant about building on platforms with security concerns.
