Crypto exploits

InternetToken exploit analysis

On 2026-09-21, an attacker on Base minted 925.41M INT against a permissionless swapV3 entry, then sold 161.27M of it into the real INT/WETH pool for 5.85 WETH.

Reported loss
764,145,702 INT + 5.846988 WETH (attacker minted 925.41M INT total, dumped 161.27M into the real INT/WETH pool for the WETH, reproduced to the wei), per DeFiHackLabs
Logged

Logged as “2026-09-21: Permissionless Swapv3 With Caller Supplied Pool Lets A Fake Callback Mint Int Arbitrarily on InternetToken”.

Analysis1 min read

The InternetToken (INT) deployer on Base was drained on 2026-09-21 when a permissionless swapV3 wrapper accepted a caller-supplied Uniswap V3 pool and trusted its callback to mint INT (attack transaction, block 51593878). DeFiHackLabs reconstructs the exploit on a Base fork and reproduces both the mint and the WETH leg to the wei.

The vulnerable contract wraps a Uniswap V3 swap path: the user supplies a path array of token addresses and fees, the wrapper locates or creates the corresponding V3 pool, and on the post-swap callback it pays out the input token's "from" amount in INT to the caller. The wrapper never verifies that the pool it is talking to is the canonical V3 deployment for that pair: it accepts any contract that implements IUniswapV3Pool and that returns the right shape from a swap() call. The callback can therefore be a hostile contract that mints INT on demand.

The attacker deployed a fake pool whose swap() callback minted the requested INT into the wrapper's payout path. Across the run, the attacker minted 925.41M INT and dumped 161.27M of it into the canonical INT/WETH pool on Base for 5.846988 WETH. DeFiHackLabs records a net profit of 764,145,702 INT plus 5.846988 WETH, the wei value matching a reconstruction that mints through the same wrapper against the attacker's fake pool.

A correct implementation would resolve the pool address itself from the canonical Uniswap V3 factory for the supplied token pair and fee tier, and would refuse to swap against any contract that does not match that resolved address.

Sources read (2)

Other exploits

Query every incident yourself — free, no signup

Updated 14 Oct 2026. Figures are as reported by the sources listed above and are not independently verified.