Hackers have stolen over $340 million from crypto “bridges” in just the first five months of 2026 — and if you’ve ever moved tokens between blockchains, your money could have been caught in the crossfire. Here’s what’s happening and what you can do about it.
By Elena Kowalski | June 4, 2026
Think of a blockchain bridge like a digital ferry service. You want to move your tokens from Ethereum to Solana? A bridge takes your tokens on one side and gives you equivalent tokens on the other. Sounds simple enough — except these ferries are carrying billions of dollars, and hackers have figured out how to sink them.
Security firm PeckShield just dropped a report that should worry anyone who uses crypto. They tracked 14 separate bridge attacks in 2026 alone, totaling $340.7 million in stolen funds. Two attacks — the KelpDAO hack and the Drift Protocol breach — accounted for over half a billion dollars combined. While Bitcoin trades near $63,800 and Ethereum sits around $1,778, the infrastructure connecting these networks is getting robbed blind.
How Are Hackers Stealing the Money?
PeckShield found that attackers use three main tricks to drain these bridges:
1. Bug in the code. Bridges are complex — they have to understand the rules of two different blockchains at the same time. That complexity hides bugs. The biggest heist of the year happened on April 18 when someone exploited a tiny logic error in the KelpDAO and LayerZero bridge and walked away with $292 million. The code looked fine on the surface, but one small mistake let the attacker trick the system into releasing funds it should have kept locked up.
2. Stealing the master keys. Some bridges use a group of trusted people (called validators) to approve transfers. If someone steals those approval keys, they don’t need to find a bug — they can just approve their own fake withdrawals. That’s likely what happened to Gravity Bridge on May 30, when $5.4 million vanished. The bridge’s code was solid; the attacker simply had the keys to the vault.
3. Fake websites. Some attackers create lookalike bridge websites that trick users into sending their money to the wrong place. You think you’re using the real bridge, but you’re actually handing your tokens to a thief.
The Biggest Heists of 2026
Here are the most damaging bridge attacks tracked by PeckShield:
- Drift Protocol — lost $285 million on April 1. Reports suggest North Korean hacking groups may be behind this one.
- KelpDAO / LayerZero — $292 million stolen on April 18, the single largest bridge exploit of 2026.
- Gravity Bridge — $5.4 million lost on May 30 to suspected key theft.
- TAC Cross-Chain Layer (TON) — $2.8 million drained in a separate incident.
- TransitFinance — a cross-chain swap tool that lost $1.88 million on May 13.
And bridges are just one part of the problem. The total amount of cryptocurrency stolen across all types of attacks in 2026 is estimated at roughly $2.1 billion. Bridges account for a big chunk of that, even though they’re only a tiny fraction of all crypto services. That’s what makes this so alarming — hackers keep hitting the same weak spot over and over.
What’s Being Done to Fix This?
Security experts have a few ideas to make bridges safer:
Better key management. Right now, too many bridges rely on a small group of people holding master keys. If those keys get stolen, it’s game over. The fix? Spread the keys across different people, different locations, even different countries — and use special hardware that makes stealing them much harder. Think of it like a bank vault that requires managers in five different cities to open it at the same time.
Mathematical proof that the code is correct. Instead of just having humans read the code and hope they catch every bug, some teams are using a technique called “formal verification.” This uses math to prove that the code behaves exactly as intended under every possible scenario. It’s expensive and slow, but it would have caught the bug that cost KelpDAO $292 million.
Limiting how much money can flow through a single bridge. Some new bridges are adding speed limits — if someone tries to move an unusually large amount of money, the system slows down and gives the team time to investigate before the funds are gone.
What Should You Do Right Now?
If you regularly move crypto between blockchains, here are five steps you can take today to protect yourself:
1. Don’t leave money sitting in bridges. Bridges are for moving money, not storing it. Once your transfer is done, withdraw your funds to your own wallet immediately. Every minute your money sits in a bridge is a minute it’s exposed to hackers.
2. Stick with established bridges. A bridge that’s been around for years, has public security audits, and has survived real attacks is safer than a brand-new one offering amazing rewards. The newest bridge is usually the least tested.
3. Double-check the URL. Fake bridge websites that look identical to the real thing are a common scam. Bookmark the official website of any bridge you use. Don’t find it through Google or click links in chat groups.
4. Ask yourself: do you even need to bridge? Many popular tokens are now available directly on multiple blockchains. If you can use the native version, you skip the bridge risk entirely.
5. Follow security firms on social media. Accounts like PeckShield post real-time alerts when bridges get hacked. If a bridge you use gets attacked, you might have only minutes to move your money. Being first to know can be the difference between keeping your crypto and losing it.
The cryptocurrency market remains highly volatile. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.
14 attacks in 5 months and bridges are still treated like an afterthought. the KelpDAO one alone was what, 200m+? insane that this keeps happening
14 bridge hacks and counting. at some point the industry needs to admit that most bridges are rushed products with zero insurance. users bear all the risk
zero insurance is the key point. users trust bridges with millions in TVL but have no recourse when the smart contract gets exploited
The smart contract logic flaw angle is underrated. Bridges have to reconcile rules across entirely different VMs, the attack surface is massive. Nobody audits deep enough.
yuki the VM reconciliation problem is exactly right. you are basically translating between two languages with different grammar rules and hoping nothing gets lost. formal verification should be mandatory for bridges
audit_or_die formal verification adds maybe 2 weeks to deploy and prevents 90% of these. teams skip it because users dont demand it
reconciling rules between different VMs is basically building a translator between incompatible languages. the attack surface grows with every new chain you support
reconciling state between two different VMs is fundamentally harder than people think. you are building a translator between incompatible languages with billions at stake
$340M across 14 attacks and the common thread is always state reconciliation between VMs. nobody solves this they just patch around it
half a billion from two attacks and peckshield is the only one paying attention lol. where are the bridge teams at
trashpanda77 peckshield tracks it but bridge teams dont act on warnings. Certik had flagged Drift’s oracle dependency weeks before the exploit
certik flagged drifts oracle dependency before the exploit and nobody listened. peckshield can only do so much when teams treat audits as checkbox theater
14 bridge attacks in 5 months and the solution is always more audits after the fact. bridges need formal verification before deployment not after
14 bridge hacks in 5 months and people still bridge through unknown protocols for a 0.2% fee discount. the KelpDAO and Drift attacks were both preventable with basic verification checks that nobody apparently ran
warp_lane_ the issue is bridges are fundamentally trusted third parties wrapped in decentralization theater. you are handing assets to a multisig and hoping they dont get drained. same security model as a CEX
Lieselotte F. decentralization theater is the perfect phrase. you hand tokens to a 5-of-8 multisig and call it trustless. same model as FTX with extra steps
KelpDAO alone was over $200M? and bridge teams still resist mandatory formal verification. the cost of one audit is less than 0.1% of what they lost
the article compares them to ferry services but real ferries have insurance. bridges lose your tokens and the best you get is a governance vote for a reimbursement plan that takes 18 months
n0v4_bridge_ the ferry comparison is perfect until you realize ferries have insurance and coast guard regulation. bridges have a multisig and a discord server
insurance_gap_ the multisig plus discord model is exactly why. real ferries carry insurance because regulators force them to. crypto bridges operate in a regulatory void and users pay the price
n0v4_bridge_ the governance vote point is painfully accurate. lost funds on a bridge hack and waited 14 months for a reimbursement that paid 12 cents on the dollar
14 attacks and $340M later teams still skip formal verification because it adds 2 weeks to launch. the cost ratio is insane
340M across 14 attacks and people still bridge through random protocols to save 0.1pct on fees. the cheapest bridge is always the most expensive one
built a bridge last year, the VM translation problem is no joke. encoding Solidity logic into Solana program semantics is where 90 percent of bugs live
Soren V. encoding solidity into solana program semantics is exactly where the bugs live. wrote a bridge last year and the VM translation layer took 3x longer than expected
Soren V. the VM translation layer is where every bridge dies. encoding Solidity logic into Solana semantics is basically writing a compiler that handles money and hoping you got every edge case