Arbitrum freezes $71 million, sparking controversy: Can decentralization still be "manually intervened"?

BlockBeats News, April 24 — Following the KelpDAO attack, the Arbitrum Security Council took action to freeze over 30k ETH (approximately $71 million), successfully preventing some stolen funds from being transferred, but also sparking intense debate about the “decentralized boundary.”

This operation was carried out by a security council composed of 12 members elected by token holders, which used special permissions to transfer funds from the attacker’s address to a “userless wallet,” effectively freezing the assets. Supporters argue that this move bought critical time for the industry, preventing further laundering of the funds, and is a necessary mechanism for “security first.”

Critics point out that this case proves that even in so-called decentralized networks, key moments can still be intervened in and altered by a small group of people, challenging the core idea of “code is law,” and raising concerns about potential future abuse.

Arbitrum responded that this mechanism is designed to be transparent and community-authorized, essentially serving as “the last line of defense in extreme situations,” reflecting a balance between security and decentralization, rather than a negation of the latter.