Abstract:Smart-contract audit company CertiK has been awarded the sum of $500k by Sui Foundation for the discovery of a potential attack vector on the Sui network.

Smart-contract audit company CertiK has been awarded the sum of $500k by Sui Foundation for the discovery of a potential attack vector on the Sui network.
The firm discovered a vulnerability that a malicious smart contract can trigger, leading to an endless circle for the blockchains nodes, and paralysis of the network.
According to a press release from CertiK on June 19, the HamsterWheel attack is different from traditional attacks that shut down chains by crashing nodes. Instead, it works like something running on a hamster wheel by trapping all nodes in a state of ceaseless operation without processing new transactions.
It is capable of crippling entire networks and eventually making them inoperable. Chief security officer at CertiK, Kang Li, said that “the discovery of the HamsterWheel attack demonstrates the evolving sophistication of threats to blockchain networks”.
The Sui Foundation revealed that the identification of the bug will enable a team of developers to install two main measures capable of reducing the possible effect of a similar issue in the long run. They have rolled out fixes for the bug and a full technical report will be published later, said CertiK


Did you incur trading losses on the Spreadex platform due to wider spreads? Have you experienced delays in trade processing by the United Kingdom-based forex broker? Has your Spreadex trading account been closed without any explanation? You are not alone! Many traders have expressed concerns on online broker review platforms. In this Spreadex review 2026, we have covered user allegations and provided a regulatory framework the broker operates under.

A broker can launch a white-label platform quickly and still fail the first serious operating test. The failure often begins quietly: an assets expansion has been approved, the client app is branded, and a new account journey looks complete. Then a client asks why a trade-related status, funding hand-off, or account restriction looks different across channels. Support cannot see the same reference trail as operations. The product owns the screen, but no one owns the explanation. The issue is not a missing feature. It is an untested operating model. That is why a cTrader white label platform should be evaluated as a route to a multi-asset service - not as a shortcut to a more attractive terminal. The central question is whether the broker can add instruments, client channels, integrations, and service capacity without making its controls harder to operate or explain.

Perry Warjiyo resigned as Bank Indonesia governor, Destry Damayanti became acting governor, and the rupiah traded above Rp18,000. Here is what forex traders should monitor next.
The visible fee in an MT4 white label proposal is rarely the real cost of operating it. For an existing broker, the decision is not simply whether an MT4 white label platform is “cheap” or “expensive.” The real question is whether the commercial model remains viable after integration, support, data, client migration, compliance, and exit costs are included. That is why an MT4 white label cost review should be built as a 24- to 36-month operating case. It should compare three credible choices: 1. Keep the present MT4 setup and improve its weakest controls. 2. Replace the MT4 white label provider but retain the client proposition. 3. Migrate selected clients or products to another platform while running MT4 in parallel. This guide explains how to build that case without relying on headline prices or generic vendor claims.