Ethereum’s recent Pectra test on the Sepolia fork ran into an issue that was exacerbated by an unknown user sending a zero-token transfer, Golden Finance reported. According to an Ethereum developer, the Sepolia testnet’s recent Pectra upgrade hit a bug and got worse after an attacker used an “edge case” to cause empty blocks to be mined.
Pectra launched on its last testnet, Sepolia, on March 5 at 7:29 a.m., but Ethereum developer Marius van der Wijden said in a March 8 post that the team immediately started seeing error messages on its geth nodes and that empty blocks were mined.
According to Van der Wijden, the reason for the error is that the deposit contract triggers the wrong type of event – a transmission event instead of a deposit event. While the fix was rolled out, van der Wijden said they missed an edge case where an unknown user exploited the vulnerability by sending a 0 token transfer to a deposit address, triggering the bug again.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
An attacker's use of an "edge case" caused an error in the Pectra upgrade of the Sepolia testnet after mining an empty block
Ethereum’s recent Pectra test on the Sepolia fork ran into an issue that was exacerbated by an unknown user sending a zero-token transfer, Golden Finance reported. According to an Ethereum developer, the Sepolia testnet’s recent Pectra upgrade hit a bug and got worse after an attacker used an “edge case” to cause empty blocks to be mined. Pectra launched on its last testnet, Sepolia, on March 5 at 7:29 a.m., but Ethereum developer Marius van der Wijden said in a March 8 post that the team immediately started seeing error messages on its geth nodes and that empty blocks were mined. According to Van der Wijden, the reason for the error is that the deposit contract triggers the wrong type of event – a transmission event instead of a deposit event. While the fix was rolled out, van der Wijden said they missed an edge case where an unknown user exploited the vulnerability by sending a 0 token transfer to a deposit address, triggering the bug again.