BonkDAO lost approximately $21 million in treasury funds as a result of a malicious governance proposal. The incident was not a traditional contractual loophole, more like the use of the governance process in the context of low voter participation, which subsequently triggered discussions in the Solana community on the DAO mechanism.

The malicious proposal was voted upon.

According to reports, the attackers first bought a sufficient number of BONKs to meet the threshold for initiating the governance proposal, and then submitted a proposal, number BIP-76, for the transfer of approximately 4.4 trillion BONKs to the wallets under their control.

The proposal was finally adopted with a support rate of approximately 99 per cent due to low voter turnout and almost non-voting. The funds were subsequently transferred to another wallet, which was about $21 million in size by reporting calibre.

BonkDAO has sought legal action.

BonkDAO is currently trying to take legal action against the person behind the address. The report cites data on the chain that the wallet used to create proposals and receive funds was initially funded by Bybit, which means that the trading platform may have information relevant to authentication.

However, the market still disagrees as to whether the incident constitutes an offence. Some argue that this is more like an operation using governance rules than a typical hacker attack.

BONK once fell by about 8%.

After the incident, BONK once fell by about 8%. According to the report, its market value was approximately $375 million at that time. For a Meme coin that depends on community narratives and ecological identity, the emptiness of the vaults directly strikes market sentiment.

Bonk is still more symbolic in the Solana community. At the end of 2022, it rose rapidly in the low valley after the FTX collapse, and was seen by many community members as an important symbol of the upswing in the drive chain.

Additional information:It was mentioned that some of the chain analysts were of the view that, if the statements used in the proposal to obtain support were to be found to be false commitments, the BonkDAO follow-up proceedings might revolve around the nature of fraud.