Ethereum’s $1.4B Heist: Roll Back the Blockchain or Face the Music? Vitalik’s 2016 Dilemma Returns
Following the massive Bybit hack on Feb 21, 2025, in which hackers stole about $1.4 billion worth of ethereum (ETH) from the exchange’s cold wallet, a contentious debate has emerged within the crypto community regarding whether to roll back the Ethereum blockchain to reverse the theft.
Ethereum’s 2025 Crisis: Reverse $1.4B Hack or Fund Terror? Community at War Over Blockchain’s Future
Prominent figures such as Arthur Hayes, co-founder of Bitmex and a major ETH holder, have publicly urged Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin to back a rollback. A blockchain rollback could revert the Bybit theft. They point to 2016, when Ethereum executed a hard fork to recover funds stolen in the DAO hack, as a precedent. “Vitalik Buterin, will you advocate to roll back the chain to help [Bybit],” Hayes said.
The Bitmex co-founder added:
My own view as a mega ETH bag holder is ETH stopped being money in 2016 after the DAO hack [hard fork]. If the community wanted to do it again, I would support it because we already voted no on immutability in 2016 [Why] not do it again?
Similarly, bitcoin maximalist Samson Mow and others have joined the discussion—some seemingly teasing Buterin—calling for a rollback while drawing attention to the loss’s magnitude, which has made the hacker one of the largest ETH holders. Many contend that the loss is too substantial for Ethereum regardless of the outcome. “Ethereum is toast,” one individual said.
“Ethereum is toast,” one individual remarked on X. “They can roll back the chain and destroy what is left of the decentralization claim or allow North Korean baad actors to keep $1.4B of ETH and unleash an eternal internal battle. Either way, it is terrible.” Other voices have called for the rollback. “If Vitalik and the Ethereum Foundation don’t push through a hard fork to defund these North Korean hackers, they need to be held responsible for aiding and abetting global terrorism,” one person wrote.
This statement sparked a range of responses on X, with many asserting that Ethereum is dealing with a significant moral dilemma either way. “Vitalik is caught in a nightmare he can’t win,” another person wrote. “Roll back the chain and Ethereum proves it’s centralized. Do nothing and Ethereum funds North Korean terrorism and will suffer brutal OFAC sanctions. Either way, Ethereum is finished. The only question is how fast it collapses.”
Trapped between reversing history or enabling criminal exploitation, Ethereum now stands at an undeniably difficult crossroads similar to the DAO 2016 rollback. Its leadership faces a stark dilemma challenging core values, leaving a divided community and cautious investors in suspense. With each choice carrying significant risk, the platform’s future credibility hangs in the balance, forcing it to navigate between preserving decentralization and confronting emerging threats head-on.
