Ethereum Prysm client vulnerability causes network outage: validators lose over $1 million, highlighting client centralization risk

2025-12-14 13:20:13

Abstract generation in progress

【CryptoWorld】A software vulnerability in the Prysm client was lurking for about a month, only fully triggered after the recent Fusaka upgrade. The network experienced a disruption, 41 epochs were lost, and 248 blocks disappeared. Validators directly lost 382 ETH, worth over a million dollars. The participation rate in the entire network once dropped to 75%, illustrating how chaotic the situation was at that time.

What’s even more heartbreaking is that this incident exposed a systemic risk: Lighthouse, as a validator client, dominated with a 51.39% share. Excessive centralization means a single point of failure could trigger a chain reaction. The industry has since begun to reflect — it is essential to promote client diversification and prevent any one client from monopolizing the network.

ETH-0.19%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SchrodingerWallet

· 12-17 13:20

Once again, something went wrong, this time it's Prysm... Did 382 ETH just disappear? It's unbelievable. Lighthouse is already at 51% and still not diversified, just waiting for the next explosion. Validators are going to suffer heavy losses this time. Had I known, I wouldn't have all-in on a single client.

View OriginalReply0

MissedAirdropAgain

· 12-16 18:26

A monopoly of a single client is really a ticking time bomb...

View OriginalReply0

tx_or_didn't_happen

· 12-14 13:50

Here we go again, this time Prysm is mining traps, I'm really speechless. --- A single client holding 51%? That's a ticking time bomb, sooner or later something will go wrong. --- 382 ETH lost, that hurts... this is the price of lack of diversification. --- Lighthouse dominates alone, it will crash sooner or later, and now it doesn't seem unfair at all. --- Why are these basic infrastructures always having issues? Haven't they even run tests on the testnet? --- With such high ecological concentration, they still dare to say they are decentralized, hilarious. --- Validators will again be blamed this time, the clients' pot will be paid for by them. --- Losing 248 blocks is no small matter, how did it take so long to discover the loophole? --- Now it's better, major foundations should start compensating, or confidence will collapse. --- Lighthouse holding such a large share has long been warned, and now it's become a reality.

View OriginalReply0

MidnightGenesis

· 12-14 13:46

On-chain data shows 248 blocks disappeared directly. This detail is quite interesting... What exactly happened on Prysm's side? What was changed during the deployment late at night? --- Lighthouse being over 51% should have been alert enough long ago. As expected, a single point of failure caused a major crash. Based on past experience, such incidents will happen again. --- 382 ETH lost. Looking at the code, Prysm's crash this time was quite thorough. It’s worth noting that the official statement didn’t specify which line caused the problem... --- 41 epochs lost. I just want to know why the monitoring system didn’t detect the anomaly in advance. Is this a technical issue or something else... --- The interesting part is, how many people insist on running all validators on a single client. Now it's clear. Diversification is really not just for show. --- So the question is, did the Prysm team know about this vulnerability early? From my observation, the testing before release was not thorough enough.

View OriginalReply0

RebaseVictim

· 12-14 13:44

Now we've really been face-slapped; putting concentration on the chain is a ticking time bomb. Single client 51%? Isn't that centralized? And still have the nerve to talk about decentralization? Prysm's failure this time, is it Lighthouse's turn next? Betting one ETH.

View OriginalReply0

FlatlineTrader

· 12-14 13:31

Prysm has failed, and the issue of client centralization will inevitably cause problems; now it's just confirmed.

View OriginalReply0

AltcoinTherapist

· 12-14 13:30

Again, another bug? Prysm this time went too far, just freeze ETH. --- Lighthouse dominance at 51%? Isn't that just a casino game of guess high or low? --- 382 ETH is gone just like that; validators are really having a tough time. --- Stop just calling for it, we need real decentralization. If not, this will happen again sooner or later. --- I just want to know who should compensate for this loss... --- Is this considered an "black swan" moment for Ethereum? --- The issue of client centralization has been discussed for so long and still isn't resolved, truly terrible. --- It feels like every major incident repeats the same topics; can't the industry learn? --- Lighthouse needs to hurry up and improve stability, the whole network is relying on you.

View OriginalReply0

BanklessAtHeart

· 12-14 13:25

prysm has caused trouble again, now ETH holders are worried. Just thinking about a single point of failure is unsettling.

View OriginalReply0

RektDetective

· 12-14 13:22

This is why I keep saying not to go all in on a single client. Now it's okay, right? --- Prysm is causing trouble again, 382 ETH gone. How many people must have been liquidated? --- The fact that Lighthouse accounts for 51.39% is honestly a bit scary; risk diversification is really needed. --- It's always like this—only thinking about diversifying after something happens. Why didn't I do it earlier? --- Validators have really become the scapegoats; they have to bear the vulnerabilities too. --- It's again the fault of client centralization. Don't ecosystems know about this? --- No, why does Prysm still hold such a large share? Will people still use it after this? --- Losing 248 blocks is too outrageous; systemic risk is just off the charts. --- I just want to know what those big validators are feeling right now. How long will it take to recover from a loss of 382 ETH?

View OriginalReply0