How much was lost in the fcdep hack?

The fcdep hack resulted in $675K in losses on April 21, 2023.

What attack technique was used in the fcdep exploit?

The fcdep exploit utilized Rugpull. Understanding this attack vector is critical for smart contract auditors and developers building secure DeFi protocols.

How can developers prevent similar smart contract attacks?

Preventing smart contract hacks requires a combination of secure coding practices, thorough security audits, and understanding common attack vectors like reentrancy, oracle manipulation, and access control flaws. Smart Contract Hacking (SCH) provides hands-on training to help developers and auditors identify and prevent vulnerabilities before deployment.

fcdep Hack

TOTAL LOST $675K

Low Apr 21, 2023 Rugpull

Affected Chain 2023 Incident surface

Recovered - No recovery reported

All-Time Rank #928 By amount stolen

Protocol Type Exit Scam/Rugpull Target category

Incident Overview

Quick Summary

On the 21st of April fcdep (EPMAX) on the BSC chain was rugged for approx 675k USD.

Details of the Exploit

The team responsible for managing liquidity in the fcdep (EPMAX) protocol executed a liquidity removal scam, causing the project to suffer significant losses. The contract deployer removed a significant amount of liquidity pool (LP) and sold off the token, leading to a sharp drop of around 90% in its initial price.

Block Data Reference

Scammer:

https://bscscan.com/address/0xca91ca94…b4fc8b

Liquidity removal:

https://bscscan.com/tx/0xbc66cdb8…8a78ce

Incident Report

Protocol / Project fcdep

Date of Incident April 21, 2023

Attack Technique Rugpull

Classification Token

Primary Source View Post-Mortem

Protocol Information

Protocol Type Exit Scam/Rugpull

Affected Token EPMAX

Team Anonymous

Source Code Unverified

What the Attacker Needed to Succeed

Understanding the prerequisites for this type of attack helps auditors identify protocols that are most at risk and helps developers build better defenses.

Technical Knowledge Deep understanding of rugpull and Solidity and EVM internals

Capital Required Seed capital to cover gas and initial position setup

On-Chain Access Ability to interact with smart contracts and deploy a custom exploit contract

Protocol Analysis Identification of the exploitable vulnerability in fcdep's contract logic - root cause: token

Execution Speed Precise transaction ordering and timing to exploit the vulnerability within a single atomic block

Obfuscation Plan A strategy to launder and move stolen funds - typically through mixers, cross-chain bridges, or decentralized DEX swaps to resist tracing

What Auditors Should Check

Could this have been caught in audit? Hard to catch — private key / OpSec failures are outside smart contract audit scope

If you're auditing a protocol with similar architecture to fcdep, these are the critical security checks that could have prevented this incident (April 2023).

Verify all logic paths related to Rugpull are guarded by proper access controls and input validation
Review privileged functions (owner, admin, governance) for potential abuse vectors - centralization risks should be documented and bounded with timelocks or multi-sigs

Master these auditing techniques with hands-on labs and real exploit scenarios in the Smart Contract Hacking course.

Free Trial

Sources & References

01
Source 1 https://twitter.com/CertiKAlert/status/1649436134013820928?s=20

Threat Assessment

Severity Level

LOW

Attack Vector Rugpull
Root Cause Token
Year 2023

Learn to Prevent the Next fcdep

The fcdep hack is one of many attacks that skilled auditors are trained to detect before deployment. Master real exploit patterns and defense techniques with hands-on Web3 security training.

Start Free Trial Browse Attack Library