2019 was characterized by cryptocurrency millionaire thefts, most of the time exchanges were punctured, but there are also cases where blockchains have been punctured thanks to vulnerabilities that had gone unnoticed; if you thought that the theft chapter could be closed next year, then you were wrong. The last order to be punctured was NULS, which lost 480 thousand dollars due to a hack communicated yesterday via twitter. Once the problem emerged, NULS decided to create a mandatory update with a hard fork, aimed both at solving the vulnerability that emerged and at preventing hackers from placing all the stolen tokens on the markets. At this time, in fact, it is estimated that only 130 thousand dollars have been transferred to the exchanges, following the hard fork, therefore, the residual share of stolen tokens burned to prevent these coins from being exchanged. The hard fork will take place at block 87800 and the exchanges dealing with NULS have already been informed and are actively working to manage the situation; NULS is a blockchain platform that is aimed primarily at companies and was recently surveyed in 4th place in the latest report on the ranking of cryptocurrencies produced by the China's Center for Information and Industry Development. The serious thing in my opinion is that network security is one of the predominant aspects in the attribution of the ranking by the Chinese CCID, so the fact that a few weeks after the last report, a blockchain like NULS has been pierced opens a series of obvious considerations on the credibility and usefulness of this type of ranking, as well as on the ways in which they are drawn up.

The way, then, in which NULS has decided to manage the situation, by means of a hard fork whose aim is to destroy the stolen coins, reopens an old wound in the world of cryptocurrencies, relating to the scandal The DAO that leads to the birth of ethereum classic. On June 18, 2016, for the uninitiated, the members of the Ethereum community (who had created The DAO fund) noticed that the accumulated deposits were decreasing and a good 70 million dollars were removed from the network in a few hours; It was then decided to manage the thing precisely by means of a fork, which would restore the situation prior to the theft, however this opened infinite controversies on the unchanging nature of the blockchain and, precisely from these controversies, ethereum classic was finally born. Now, then, here we go again, once again we have a cryptocurrency theft and again we decide to manage it by means of a fork; however this time the community does not seem willing to react in such a polemical way as happened in the case of The DAO, probably because NULS is not even remotely comparable, in terms of importance and relevance, ad ethereum, however, the chosen way of managing the situation remains open again the controversy over the ineffective immutability of a blockchain. Furthermore, the market did not react as violently as it would have been reasonable to expect, NULS quotations currently do not seem to have been affected too much by the incident and, frankly, this is also a paradox that is difficult to understand.