Flow Chain Rollback Controversy: deBridge Founder Warns of Systemic Risks

DAOplomacy · 2025-12-28T12:50:18+00:00

On December 28th, the Flow team decided to roll back the blockchain, sparking widespread controversy. deBridge co-founder Alex Smirnov pointed out that this move lacked communication with key ecosystem partners and could lead to economic losses and systemic risks. He called on Flow validators to suspend transaction execution until a clear compensation mechanism is established and coordination is completed to maintain ecosystem stability.

DAOplomacy

2025-12-28 12:50:18

Abstract generation in progress

[BlockBeats] The Flow team made a controversial decision on December 28th — to roll back the blockchain. This move immediately drew widespread attention and concern within the ecosystem.

deBridge co-founder Alex Smirnov spoke out on social media, highlighting several core issues with this rollback. First, the Flow team did not sufficiently communicate and coordinate in advance with key ecosystem partners—including bridge service providers, centralized exchanges, and decentralized exchanges. As one of Flow’s main bridge providers, deBridge expressed concern—lack of coordination could entail significant risks.

Smirnov emphasized a deeper issue: rushing to roll back the chain could cause economic losses that far exceed the impact of the original attack itself. This is not just a numerical problem but involves systemic risk. Bridges, custodians, users, and trading counterparts who adhered to rules and acted honestly during the affected window could all suffer losses. The rollback would break the trust foundation on the chain.

In light of these risks, Smirnov urged all Flow validators to exercise caution: until a clear compensation plan is established, ecosystem partner coordination is completed, and the security team is fully involved, validation of transactions on the rollback chain should be paused.

Currently, on-chain data shows that Flow’s state has been rolled back, but new transactions have not yet been enabled. Every decision during this window could impact the stability of the entire ecosystem.

FLOW7,55%

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.

16 Likes

Reward
16
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MEV_Whisperer

· 7h ago

Oh no, Flow is causing trouble again... This rollback was way too hasty. Messing up and dragging down ecosystem partners? deBridge must be furious. The risk of rollback is actually greater than the attack itself, this logic is truly brilliant. Flow team's communication skills are really concerning. Who would dare to integrate if this continues? Unilateral operation without prior notice, isn't this just courting disaster? The term "systemic risk" is used well, definitely something to be cautious about.

View OriginalReply0

fomo_fighter

· 7h ago

Flow's move this time is really outrageous, not even a single notification? --- Is a rollback more damaging than an attack? That logic is quite interesting. --- Once again proving the cost of centralized decision-making, are ecosystem partners just decorations? --- The term systemic risk is being heard more and more; it feels like the entire chain ecosystem is walking a tightrope. --- deBridge dares to speak frankly, I respect that, better than some projects. --- Uncoordinated rollbacks just cause trouble, isn't that inviting problems? --- The economic loss has surpassed the original attack, how rushed must that have been? --- It seems that Flow's move was not very smart. --- Wow, is it really so difficult to notify the ecosystem before an incident? --- We must take systemic risk seriously; otherwise, it will be even more troublesome later.

View OriginalReply0

MEVSandwich

· 8h ago

Flow's move is really outrageous, they rolled back without even saying a word? This is the current state of Web3. Where is the promised decentralization? The loss from the rollback is even greater than the original attack. Isn't this shooting oneself in the foot? There was no communication with bridging providers like deBridge at all. Are they really trying to kill the ecosystem? They talk about systemic risk well, but I'm afraid other chains will also follow Flow's approach.

View OriginalReply0

MEVHunterNoLoss

· 8h ago

This is a typical case of after-the-fact armchair strategizing. Why didn't you do it earlier? Rollback is indeed harsh, but lack of communication is even harsher. It's the same old story: "We're doing this for the good of the ecosystem," but in the end, it ends up harming everyone involved. Systemic risk is a good way to describe the consequences of a lack of coordination. So, such major actions must be announced in advance; otherwise, a trust crisis is the real disaster.

View OriginalReply0

0xRich