Blockchain Networks Shut Down Amid Security Threats: Who Holds the Power?

Over the course of four days, three major blockchain networks, Cronos, Ontology, and ICON, halted operations in response to security threats. Each network handled the situation differently, with Cronos rewriting part of its official chain history.

Cronos stated that after the Tectonic protocol suffered a vulnerability attack, validating nodes shut down the network through a consensus mechanism, restoring the chain to its state before the attack and restarting block production from block height 90,896,189. This operation not only halted block production but also directly rewrote the chain state, rendering transactions and state changes occurring after the recovery point null.

Ontology and ICON adopted another set of emergency measures. Ontology paused block production before confirming malicious attacks, while ICON first paused the attacked contracts and then shut down the entire network. The foundation stated that it controlled the network during the migration phase, at which point most of the stolen ICX had already been transferred to exchange custody accounts.

The blockchain shutdown is merely the first layer of control measures. The deeper question is: who has the authority to order the network shutdown? Can they rewrite the confirmed chain state? What losses will be irretrievable when funds cross chains or enter centralized custody institutions?