THORChain co-founder defends decentralization model amid hack controversy

THORChain's co-founder and lead developer, Chad Barraford, has reignited the debate over decentralization in blockchain networks. In October 2026, he argued that THORChain is more decentralized than Bitcoin and Ethereum, despite taking criticism following a major hack. The controversy stemmed from THORChain's decision not to intervene when Bitget suffered a $387.5 million hack in September 2026.

Barraford defended the protocol's stance on neutrality, stating that THORChain cannot selectively block transactions, just as Bitcoin or Ethereum cannot. He explained that THORChain's governance is collective, with validators voting on changes and most decisions requiring approval from two-thirds of nodes. However, critics point out that THORChain's threshold signature scheme (TSS) creates vulnerabilities by pooling user funds under shared signing authority.

The debate hinges on the flexibility of THORChain's governance. Emergency procedures allow the network to pause for multiples of 720 blocks, roughly 1 hour each. Critics argue that if a small group of validators can halt the network, they should also be able to freeze funds linked to hacks. Barraford counters that THORChain retired address blacklisting in February 2025 to maintain neutrality, a decision that prevents selective censorship.

Bitcoin and Ethereum prioritize rigidity in governance to resist pressure from any single group, while THORChain favors flexibility. Barraford contends that the outcome is the same: none of the three networks will censor specific transactions. Critics, however, emphasize that the number of hands on the pause button affects a network's risk profile. Investors in DeFi are urged to look beyond marketing claims of decentralization and examine how governance actually works.