12.08.2025 12:21
Monero, a cryptocurrency prioritizing user privacy, experienced a significant setback with a 51% attack launched by Qubic. This attack, confirmed by multiple sources including Ledger's CTO Charles Guillemet, signifies that Qubic now controls the majority of Monero's network's computational power, effectively undermining the decentralized nature of the blockchain. Guillemet's statement highlighted the resulting power imbalance, asserting that Qubic’s dominance allows it to discard competing transactions, essentially monopolizing the mining process.
The implications of Qubic's control are severe. The ability to manipulate the blockchain's history opens the door to large-scale rewrites, facilitating double-spending and censorship of transactions – all undermining Monero's core principles. Guillemet further estimated the daily operational cost of this attack at a staggering $75 million, yet speculated that short-term profitability may be possible. He poignantly described the situation as a $300 million market cap entity gaining control over a $6 billion one, painting a grim picture for Monero's future.
Despite the gravity of the situation, Sergey Ivancheglo, known as "Come-from-Beyond" (CFB) in the crypto community, presented a counter-narrative. Ivancheglo claimed the takeover was a proactive measure, designed to strengthen Monero's defenses against future attacks. He suggested the action was a strategic move to enhance Monero's resilience, directly addressing accusations of malicious intent and implying a more complex underlying motivation. This provocative claim, however, remains unverified and serves as a point of contention within the crypto community.
The fallout from this attack was immediate and measurable. Following the announcement, Monero's XMR token experienced a sharp decline, plummeting over 13% to $247, according to data from CryptoSlate. While the long-term consequences remain uncertain, this incident highlights the vulnerabilities inherent in even the most privacy-focused cryptocurrencies and underscores the ongoing challenges in maintaining blockchain security and decentralization. Qubic's alleged use of an incentive-driven "pay-to-switch" strategy to achieve dominance remains a subject of further investigation and analysis from internet sources.
