Save victims who mistakenly sent to contract address

Today I saw this news about recovery from the mistakenly sent

【Tether Recovers 1 Mln USDT For User Who Sent It To Wrong DeFi Address】Tether CTO Paolo Ardoino has taken to Twitter to …

Recovery would be possible if muiti-sig holders and community have the will.

Look at this situation. The number of victims continues to increase more and more now.

We need to make prevention and recovery measures from this disaster


Burning YFI will make it the hardest money in the universe. Their sacrifices will not be forgotten.


It was my understanding that YFI’s situation is much different than USDT’s. This topic was extensively discuss in the past, here. I would reference that thread for all of the reasons this wasn’t possible and the community felt minting more YFI was a bad idea.


We can’t help even if we want to. There’s no way to return funds for those who sent to the wrong address (we don’t hold the private key) or SC’s without a function that can return mistakenly sent funds (there’s no private key to begin with).

Future yearn SC’s can include preventative measures, but that will bloat up the SC’s, and introduce more chances for bugs and attack vectors.

Best thing you can do is probably have a wallet/UI for regular users that checks if the address is an SC before sending, which aren’t yearn protocols.


I like this idea to build into wallets and exchanges– a quick check to see if you’re sending to a token contract, and a warning box asking if you’re sure you want to do it. Especially as crypto tries to drive mass adoption, I think this would be a very positive upgrade.


Yeah, it’s probably a good idea for MetaMask to default to this. With an “Advanced User Mode” that turns these warnings off.


While I feel a little bad for folks who do this, I also think it seems they did not entirely understand what they are doing and puts them in the category of speculators vs actually interested in community development. In my opinion it is pretty simple to figure out how to move YFI to the correct destination through either this forum, Discord, twitter, reddit, telegram etc. Thus I don’t think we should save “victims” from lack of due diligence.


Agree that yearn finance should implement something to prevent this from happening. Not one for community compensation through multi-sig holders though as it makes it similar to centralized protocols.

Seems more like a sad consequence of user error. We can make sure our documentation and UI are clear and concise, but we shouldn’t build in measures in our code that can later be misused or exploited.

I’d be up for burning that YFI permanently and removing the ability to ever implement a method to retrieve those funds.

Its not our problem. I agree with the comments that wallet providers should add a caveat to their protocols.

I almost feel luke we are missing the moint of Crypto and reverting back to the crazy ICO days or bter where our funds were stuck. I have been around to witness the GAW miners fiasco and lost half my crypto to ICO scams and Cryptopia. Biance, kucoin are not original, projects from open ledger or Cryptopiq or LCS could have been just as efficient. What Binance did right was create a viable peoduct. Kraken was around and so i could sell my xrp when Ripple basicalky wrote off XRP and shut down XRP wallets. Defi is good if ypu can keep the crazy fees that make it too zxpensive for the average person. Eth needs to mive quickly and miners need to stop ripming off noobs who do not understand setting fees. Think Again! Just my two cents, I grew up during the glorious DC Punk days, and now my sons are in law schook. Go figure. But i learned one true fact, bands that stayed with small labels like Dischord did far better than those that sold out to corporations.

1 Like

i like the sentiment but I don’t see a viable solution. we don’t want to mint more $YFI. we can’t send it back b/c we don’t have the keys to do that. even if we could do something that auto-returns the coins, it would be taken advantage of somehow (like money laundering or something idk).

Recovery would be possible if muiti-sig holders and community have the will.

USDT recovery is possible because Tether team has some kind of owner access / priviledges baked into the USDT token smart contract itself.

USDT is not a decentralized token.
Nor is USDC, which has a ‘blacklist’ function that is controlled by USDC contract owner address

1 Like

What a load of crap. Accidents happen and the general attitude that “not my fault” is just shameful. Moreso, it is short sighted. If you want the general public to adopt crypto you need to stop acting like they are “the enemy” or not “real users” … I’m not a coder but, I have managed a shit ton in my life. You just need to bounce back the transaction to its original point of destination if not attached to an account. Banks (yes the evil banks) have been doing it in the swift system for 50 years. … wait… did the banks just out proform the crypto community in customer service?.. ahem… shame… shame. For the record i just lost $700 on this bug (it is a minuscule amount to me) but, damn it sucks to lose that to typo… many people would never come back. When it easy… adoption rates will go through the roof. (which is why people goto coinbase vs hold their own keys. The goal here is to make just as easy (and almost as safe) as signing up for coinbase. Holly shee at… this is a community that has taken on the multi national multi trillion dollar banking industry and seems to be getting some huge wins !!! yet can’t come up with a solution that keeps people from sending hard earned (or hard risked) tokens to the endless ether?