The Web3 space promised transparency, ownership, and decentralization. However, as 2025 unfolded, it also revealed how fragile that promise can be when security lags behind innovation. According to a recent GoPlus Security report, more than 1,200 Web3 security incidents were recorded during the year, resulting in an estimated 3.5 billion dollars in losses. That figure alone explains why developers, investors, and everyday users are taking security more seriously than ever.
At the same time, these incidents were not limited to obscure projects. Instead, they affected decentralized exchanges, cross-chain bridges, NFT platforms, and even well known DeFi protocols. As a result, confidence across the ecosystem took repeated hits. Yet, understanding what went wrong is the first step toward doing better.
This article breaks down the GoPlus findings, explains the most common attack patterns, and shares real examples from 2025. More importantly, it highlights how the industry can move forward with stronger defenses and smarter habits.
Understanding the GoPlus report
GoPlus Security is widely known for its real time risk detection tools across multiple blockchains. In its 2025 annual report, the firm analyzed on-chain data, smart contract behavior, phishing campaigns, and wallet level exploits. Based on this analysis, GoPlus identified over 1,200 confirmed security incidents throughout the year.
Collectively, these incidents drained approximately 3.5 billion dollars from users and protocols. While that number is alarming, the report also shows patterns that can help the industry respond more effectively. For instance, most losses came from a small number of attack categories, which means targeted improvements could significantly reduce future damage.
You can explore GoPlus and its research directly here:
https://gopluslabs.io
The most common types of Web3 attacks in 2025
Although attackers used many techniques, several categories appeared repeatedly. Understanding these patterns helps explain how losses escalated so quickly.
Smart contract vulnerabilities
First and foremost, smart contract flaws remained the leading cause of losses. Logic errors, unchecked external calls, and poorly implemented upgrade mechanisms allowed attackers to drain funds in minutes. Even audited contracts were sometimes affected, especially when last minute changes bypassed proper review.
For example, a DeFi lending protocol on a popular Layer 2 network lost over 90 million dollars after an attacker exploited a reentrancy bug introduced during a contract upgrade. Although the protocol had passed earlier audits, the new code created an unexpected attack surface.
For background on smart contract risks, ConsenSys provides a helpful overview:
https://consensys.io/smart-contract-security
Phishing and social engineering
At the same time, phishing attacks surged in both volume and sophistication. Fake airdrops, malicious NFT mints, and cloned websites tricked users into signing harmful transactions. As wallets became easier to use, attackers adapted by making scams feel more legitimate.
In one widely reported case, a phishing campaign impersonating a major NFT marketplace resulted in losses exceeding 40 million dollars in a single week. Victims believed they were approving routine listings, yet they unknowingly granted unlimited token approvals.
Chainalysis has tracked similar trends across the ecosystem:
https://www.chainalysis.com/blog/crypto-phishing-scams
Cross-chain bridge exploits
Meanwhile, cross-chain bridges remained high value targets. Because they hold large pools of locked assets, even a single vulnerability can lead to massive losses. In 2025, several bridge exploits each exceeded 100 million dollars.
One notable incident involved a bridge connecting an Ethereum sidechain to a gaming focused network. Attackers compromised the validator set, minted unbacked tokens, and quickly laundered the funds through multiple chains.
For a deeper look at bridge risks, see this analysis from Binance Research:
https://research.binance.com/en/analysis/cross-chain-bridges
Rug pulls and malicious projects
Not all losses came from external hacks. Unfortunately, rug pulls and intentionally malicious projects continued to drain user funds. In many cases, developers embedded backdoors or retained excessive control over contracts.
GoPlus noted that smaller retail users were disproportionately affected by these schemes. Often, hype driven launches moved faster than due diligence, which created ideal conditions for abuse.
A useful guide on spotting red flags in token contracts is available here:
https://cointelegraph.com/learn/how-to-spot-a-crypto-rug-pull
Real examples from 2025
To understand the scale of the problem, it helps to look at specific incidents highlighted or aligned with GoPlus findings.
A DeFi protocol drained through approval abuse
Early in 2025, a yield aggregator lost roughly 65 million dollars after users unknowingly approved a malicious contract. The exploit did not involve breaking the protocol itself. Instead, attackers relied on deceptive transaction prompts and aggressive marketing.
Because approvals were unlimited, attackers could empty wallets long after the initial interaction. This case reinforced the importance of transaction simulation and approval monitoring tools.
Etherscan provides educational resources on token approvals:
https://etherscan.io/tokenapprovalchecker
NFT mint exploit on a popular marketplace
Later in the year, an NFT minting bug allowed attackers to mint thousands of NFTs without paying. While the direct financial loss was smaller, secondary market chaos caused prices to crash, harming creators and collectors alike.
Although the exploit was fixed quickly, the reputational damage lingered. This example shows that not all losses are measured purely in stolen funds. Trust erosion also carries a cost.
OpenZeppelin discusses common NFT security pitfalls here:
https://blog.openzeppelin.com/nft-security
Governance attack on a DAO
In another case, a DAO lost control of its treasury after attackers accumulated governance tokens through flash loans. By manipulating a single proposal, they redirected funds to their own address.
While the financial loss was around 30 million dollars, the broader lesson involved governance design. Without safeguards like voting delays or quorum thresholds, decentralized governance can be surprisingly fragile.
Vitalik Buterin has written extensively about DAO governance challenges:
https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2021/08/16/voting.html
Why losses added up so quickly
The 3.5 billion dollar figure did not come from one catastrophic failure. Instead, it was the result of many incidents, repeated patterns, and slow responses. Several factors contributed to this outcome.
First, capital concentration increased. As DeFi matured, protocols held larger treasuries, which raised the stakes. Second, attackers collaborated and reused successful techniques across multiple targets. Third, users often lacked clear, real time risk signals when interacting with smart contracts.
GoPlus emphasized that many incidents could have been mitigated with better warnings at the wallet level. When users see clear alerts before signing transactions, harmful interactions become less likely.
How security tools are evolving
Despite the grim numbers, the story is not entirely negative. In fact, 2025 also marked progress in defensive tooling.
Real time risk detection
GoPlus and similar platforms expanded real time contract analysis, phishing detection, and address reputation systems. These tools flag suspicious behavior before transactions are confirmed.
For instance, wallet integrations that display risk scores helped prevent countless losses that never made headlines. Although these prevented incidents do not appear in loss statistics, their impact is significant.
Better audits and continuous monitoring
Audits alone are no longer enough. As a result, many teams adopted continuous monitoring systems that watch for abnormal on-chain behavior after deployment.
Firms like CertiK and Trail of Bits have promoted this shift:
https://www.certik.com
https://www.trailofbits.com
Education and user awareness
At the same time, user education improved. Tutorials, wallet warnings, and community driven alerts made scams easier to recognize. While no solution is perfect, informed users are harder to exploit.
A solid educational hub for crypto security basics can be found here:
https://academy.binance.com/en/articles/crypto-security-guide
Lessons for builders
For developers and project teams, the GoPlus report carries several clear signals.
First, security must be integrated from day one, not treated as a final checklist item. Second, upgrades deserve as much scrutiny as initial deployments. Third, minimizing privileged access reduces the damage if keys are compromised.
Additionally, transparency builds trust. When incidents occur, timely and honest communication helps communities recover faster.
Lessons for users
Users also play a role in reducing ecosystem risk. Simple habits can make a meaningful difference.
Regularly reviewing token approvals, using hardware wallets, and avoiding rushed decisions are practical steps. Furthermore, relying on reputable security tools and double checking links can prevent many phishing attacks.
No tool replaces caution. However, combining tools with patience significantly lowers exposure.
Web3 security’s Future
Looking beyond 2025, the industry is clearly at a crossroads. On one hand, attackers continue to innovate. On the other hand, defensive technologies are improving at a rapid pace.
The key takeaway from the GoPlus report is not just the size of the losses, but the clarity of the patterns behind them. When problems are understood, they become solvable. Over time, standards will mature, tooling will improve, and expectations will rise.
Web3 does not need to be unsafe by design. Instead, it needs consistent effort, shared responsibility, and a willingness to learn from hard lessons.
Final reflections
The GoPlus finding of over 1,200 Web3 security incidents and 3.5 billion dollars in losses during 2025 is sobering. Yet, it also provides a roadmap. Each exploit reveals a weakness, and each weakness points toward a fix.
For builders, users, and security teams alike, the message is clear. Progress depends on vigilance, collaboration, and continuous improvement. When security becomes a shared priority rather than an afterthought, the entire ecosystem becomes stronger.
Sources:
GoPlus Security official site
https://gopluslabs.io
Chainalysis crypto crime reports
https://www.chainalysis.com
ConsenSys smart contract security resources
https://consensys.io
OpenZeppelin security blog
https://blog.openzeppelin.com
Binance Academy crypto security guides
https://academy.binance.com
