Sui Validators Freeze $162M After Cetus Hack, Sparking Decentralization Debate

The Sui blockchain community is grappling with a major security incident and a deeper philosophical question: what does decentralization really mean when millions are at stake?

On May 22, 2025, Cetus Protocol—a prominent decentralized exchange (DEX) on Sui—was hacked. Approximately $223 million in digital assets were stolen after attackers exploited a smart contract vulnerability. The exploit involved spoof tokens that manipulated liquidity pools. Cetus quickly paused its contracts and, with support from the Sui Foundation and validators, managed to freeze $162 million of the stolen funds. Recovery efforts are still underway for the remaining amount.

Market Shock and On-Chain Fallout

The attack disrupted the Sui ecosystem. The price of SUI fell by 15% to $3.90. Memecoins like BULLA and MOJO dropped over 90% in value. Liquidity on Cetus dried up, with some pairs collapsing to below $150,000. Even USDC briefly depegged.

The attacker moved swiftly, bridging $63 million to Ethereum, including a 20,000 ETH transaction. Their wallet reportedly still holds over 12.9 million SUI. Blockchain analysts estimate more than $212 million was bridged within hours, drawing skepticism about Cetus’s initial claim that the issue was a mere bug.

Centralized Action or Necessary Response?

Sui validators took the unusual step of blocking transactions from addresses linked to the hack. This collectively froze much of the stolen funds. While effective, the action triggered backlash.

Critics argue that this level of coordinated control contradicts the ideals of decentralization. They liken it to censorship and note that no centralized actor should be able to override the ledger.

Supporters say the move protected users and preserved ecosystem integrity. They argue that validator consensus, especially under Sui’s delegated proof-of-stake model, is itself a decentralized mechanism.

The situation recalls Ethereum’s DAO hack in 2016, where a hard fork reversed damage. But in Sui’s case, validators acted faster, without a formal vote or fork.

Community Divided

Online reactions have been polarized. Some users say this shows Sui is not truly decentralized. Others applaud the network for acting decisively.

“If you can stop transactions by validator consensus, is it still decentralized?” one user asked on X.

“This proves validator coordination can work in emergencies,” another replied.

Transparency is another concern. The scale and speed of the attack, combined with vague public statements, have fueled suspicions. Some believe the attacker had inside knowledge or help.