Aave user loses $305,000 after Across Protocol website hijack
A depositor in Aave lost about $305,000 in a deposit token during the Nov. 10 hijack of the cross-chain bridge Across Protocol's website, according to a Bitquery investigation updated Nov. 12.
Bitquery links the loss to spending permissions requested through the compromised interface, exposing a lending position held outside the bridge.
Bitquery's revised trace estimates $401,900 taken from nine wallets across five blockchains, using prices at the time the assets were stolen, and the Aave depositor accounts for about 76% of the traced losses. The update adds a previously missed ether sweep.
Across Protocol said its domain was taken over on Nov. 10 through social engineering involving its registrar, Namecheap.
How the Aave deposit token moved after the Across Protocol hack
The asset taken from the largest wallet was aWETH, an interest-bearing token representing an Aave deposit. Aave's documentation explains that its deposit tokens can be transferred and that a signed permit can authorize another account to spend them.
In Bitquery's reconstruction, the fake site requested a permit, which the attacker then used to move the depositor's tokens, and that spending permission put the separate lending position within reach.
The first transfer transaction on Nov. 10 recorded an unlimited approval followed by about 115.23 aWETH sent to one wallet and 28.81 aWETH to another. Bitquery identifies those recipients as the attacker's wallet and the drainer's fee wallet, respectively, matching an 80/20 split.
The depositor's transfer history shows four pulls ending three minutes after the first. Bitquery says the owner revoked the approval a minute after the last pull, but the transfers had already happened by that point.
How the website attack reached an Aave deposit
Bitquery links a signed permit to the loss of an Aave deposit token. The first transaction records spending approval followed by two transfers.
ONE AAVE DEPOSITOR $304,500 76% of Bitquery's traced losses Valued when the assets were taken Aave deposit token: 148.60 aWETH $401,900 traced across nine wallets · November 12 update
ONE AAVE DEPOSITOR $304,500 76% of Bitquery's traced losses 148.60 aWETH · theft-time value $401,900 across nine traced wallets
Inside the first Aave-token transaction
Inside the first Aave-token transactionSpending permissionToken transfers
Bitquery describes a signed permit. The transaction records unlimited approval before the token transfers.
WEBSITE ROUTE: BITQUERY'S RECONSTRUCTION Across website Compromised interface Signed permit Spending permission Aave deposit token aWETH in the user's wallet Unlimited aToken approval recorded 20:09:23 UTC · November 10, 2026
WEBSITE ROUTE: BITQUERY'S ACCOUNT Across website Compromised interface Signed permit Permission to spend the deposit token aWETH in the user's wallet Unlimited approval recorded 20:09:23 UTC · November 10, 2026
The same transaction sent about 115.23 aWETH and 28.81 aWETH to the wallets Bitquery identifies as attacker and fee recipients.
FIRST OF FOUR PULLS · 20:09:23 UTC · NOVEMBER 10, 2026 Aave deposit token From depositor's wallet 80% 20% 115.23 aWETH Attacker's wallet* 28.81 aWETH Drainer fee wallet* Recipient roles attributed by Bitquery
FIRST OF FOUR PULLS · NOV. 10, 2026 20:09:23 UTC Aave deposit token From depositor's wallet 80% 20% 115.23 aWETH Attacker wallet 28.81 aWETH Fee wallet* *Recipient roles attributed by Bitquery
Spending permission over a transferable deposit token can expose a lending position held outside the bridge.
Bitquery infers the website connection from timing and recipient wallets. Blockchain records do not show the visited site or off-chain signing time. The split diagram covers only the first pull; $304,500 is the whole traced Aave-token loss.
Sources and evidence
Sources
- Bitquery November 12 investigation
- Aave tokenization documentation
- First Aave-token transaction
- Depositor token transfer history
Supporting facts
- Bitquery's November 12 investigation update estimates $401,900 taken from nine wallets on Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, BNB Chain and Optimism during the November 10 Across website hijack. [1]
- Bitquery identifies the largest affected wallet as an Aave depositor that lost 148.60 aWETH, which it values at about $304,500, or 76% of its traced losses. [1] [4]
- Aave's aTokens represent supplied assets and accrued yield, can be transferred or traded, and support permit messages that authorize another account to spend them. [2]
- At 20:09:23 UTC on November 10, an Ethereum transaction recorded an unlimited aToken approval from wallet 0x42e7...483c and transfers of about 115.23 aWETH to 0x2846...1fde and 28.81 aWETH to 0x0c7c...d37b. [3] [1]
- The Aave depositor's transfer history shows four outgoing aToken pulls between 20:09:23 and 20:12:23 UTC on November 10; Bitquery says the owner revoked the approval a minute after the last pull. [4] [1]
- The Aave transaction records show approval-based transfers of the depositor's aToken, consistent with Bitquery's account of a signed-permit theft. [1] [2] [3]
- Bitquery links the drains to across.to through their timing and recipient wallets, while acknowledging that on-chain records do not identify which website a victim visited. [1]
Method
Uses reported rounded figures and the reported 76% share; the bar is 76% filled. Approval and transfer views show two parts of the same first transaction, not separate website observations. The total Aave loss spans four pulls.
Scope
Bitquery infers the website connection from timing and recipient wallets. Blockchain records do not show the visited site or off-chain signing time. The split diagram covers only the first pull; $304,500 is the whole traced Aave-token loss.
-- Price
This content is provided for general informational purposes only and doesn't constitute financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Any events, rewards, online promotions, or related information mentioned herein should not be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or invitation to purchase, sell, trade, or otherwise deal in any crypto assets. Crypto assets are highly volatile and may result in loss. The availability of WEEX services, products, and related events may vary by region. You are responsible for ensuring that your participation is in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations.
You may also like

BitGo Mint Adds USDC Minting and Redemption Features

Aethir's First Week Burn Offsets 18.48% of Release Volume, Launches ATH Burn Dashboard

What Is Elysium Crypto? The Hyperliquid Layer 2, Gas Fees, and Token Confusion Explained
Learn what Elysium is, why it uses HYPE for gas, how KNTQ buybacks are designed, and how to distinguish bridge TVL from actual DeFi activity.

Chainalysis: The Shadow Market Behind China's AI Model "Distillation Tide" Bypassing U.S. Export Controls

GMX Governance Committee Dissolved, Internal Contributors Take Over Arbitrum Governance Responsibilities

The "Monopolist" Behind $4.6 Billion Tokenized U.S. Stocks: 91% of Assets Are Custodied by the Same Company?

Ethereum's 2028 Challenge: Quantum Resistance Roadmap Hits Release Bottleneck

Elysium Mainnet Launches with Block Time of 100 Milliseconds and Arrival Time of Approximately 300 Milliseconds

GMX DAO Votes to Transfer $7 Million in Assets to POL Multisig as Emergency Reserve

Founder of SkyBridge Capital Claims CLARITY Bill Stalled, Binance Seeks to Recover Frozen Assets

OlympusDAO completes OHM bridge migration to CCIP, adds Robinhood Chain

Stripe offers US stablecoin payouts to wallets in 160+ markets

BitMart users allege founder blocked appeals over 800,000 ATEG

Cross River Partners with Offchain Labs to Tokenize Embedded Lending Platform

Who really controls a crypto project? Inside the SEC’s new guidance

Ethereum Blobs: What Remains After 18 Days

$464,000 Stolen from Premia Labs, Assets Converted to Bitcoin

Follow the Money: $2.4 Billion in Investments, Major Round for Kalshi, and High Attention to AI — October 2026

Bitcoin Collectors Appeal to OpenSea for Trading Ordinals and Runes

Circle Releases Guide on Integrating ERC-20 Tokens with CCTP Cross-Chain

Crypto: Itaú Unibanco, Brazil's First Bank to Notify Regulator

A Joke by Hyperliquid's Founder Becomes a Reality on Wall Street

CertiK partners with Arbitrum to support Web3 startups with security tools

Robinhood Doubles Down on On-Chain Ecosystem, But Misalignment Exists Between Official Priorities and Market Expectations?

Avail Launches ShieldTX Privacy Tool to Combat Copy Trading Bots

Anchorage Digital Bank Provides Six Blockchain Custody Services for MXNB

Arbitrum Launches Developer Guild, Offchain Labs Becomes First Member

Robinhood Chain Earns $51 Million in Fees in Three Months, While Ethereum Only Receives $69,000?

Arbitrum Foundation and Robinhood Chain Open Mentor Program Applications with $100,000 Prize

GMX Introduces 180-Day Unstaking Waiting Period for Staking, Solana Revenue Used for Buybacks
BitGo Mint Adds USDC Minting and Redemption Features
Aethir's First Week Burn Offsets 18.48% of Release Volume, Launches ATH Burn Dashboard
What Is Elysium Crypto? The Hyperliquid Layer 2, Gas Fees, and Token Confusion Explained
Learn what Elysium is, why it uses HYPE for gas, how KNTQ buybacks are designed, and how to distinguish bridge TVL from actual DeFi activity.







