A leading exchange reveals OM token manipulation case: related accounts borrow and lend to inflate the price, with the security fund covering the losses

2025-12-13 04:24:15

【Block Rhythm】On December 13th, a major exchange disclosed a significant market manipulation incident on social media. The exchange discovered concrete evidence indicating that multiple related and colluding accounts adopted a carefully designed scheme: holding large amounts of OM tokens as collateral, borrowing huge amounts of USDT, and using this leveraged approach to artificially inflate the price of OM.

The risk management team promptly detected these abnormal trading signals. The exchange proactively contacted the related accounts, requesting them to correct their violations, but was met with refusal. To prevent further risk escalation, the platform then implemented strict risk control measures on these accounts. What happened next was unexpected—the price of OM plummeted sharply.

It is noteworthy that the exchange only liquidated a very small portion of OM collateral during this incident. The massive losses caused by the price crash were ultimately fully covered by the platform’s security fund. Third-party analysis reports indicated that this price plunge was mainly driven by perpetual contract trading activities on other trading platforms, while the platform’s security fund operated normally in accordance with established risk management mechanisms.

Even more outrageous, the other party has yet to explain the true origin of the huge amount of OM tokens involved, nor clarified how this manipulation group was able to control such a large proportion of the token supply. Currently, the exchange has submitted all evidence and documents to regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies, and multiple legal proceedings are underway. The exchange also criticized the project team’s attitude: not only did they fail to respond to these serious and suspicious activities, but they also continued to ignore the facts and publicly accuse the exchange.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

12 Likes

Reward
12
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GateUser-beba108d

· 12-15 22:59

OM this manipulation is pretty ruthless, the security fund covered all the costs... The pumpers should go to jail It's the same old story, the tricks are obvious but they still dare to do it? The security fund evaporated overnight, whose fault is that? If the exchange really wanted to prevent risks, they should have frozen accounts directly OM has been harvested like a bunch of chives Using USDT to pump? This move is way too obvious Ultimately, the losses are still the users' hard-earned money covering the bottom This time the platform really messed up big time

View OriginalReply0

EternalMiner

· 12-15 19:03

It's the same old trick again, with the security fund getting the shaft OM's manipulation this time is pretty ruthless, leveraging lending to push the market as usual Dare to refuse the exchange? You're really brave The security fund is completely lost? This deal is a huge loss Such obvious market manipulation, why didn't anyone notice earlier?

View OriginalReply0

DegenWhisperer

· 12-13 18:27

Here we go again, the Security Fund will cover the costs --- OM's manipulation this time was a bit amateurish, to be caught so easily --- Wait, the exchange probably made a lot of money too, now they're passing the buck to the Security Fund? --- Leverage loans for manipulation, in the end retail investors get the bag, haha --- The Security Fund is burning money again, how many times this month already --- So the exchange only earns from fees, takes on the risk themselves, this business is pretty good --- OM went straight from heaven to hell, holders suffer heavy losses --- The key question is, when will these manipulation accounts be held accountable? It feels like this just gets overlooked --- Why is it always the Security Fund taking the blame? The fund's amount is limited, brother

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeNightmare

· 12-13 04:54

It's the same old trick again—pumping and dumping to wipe out the safety fund, exchanges getting repeatedly exploited... Losing so much but still willing to take the risk, it feels like there's less and less room for retail investors. OM is truly finished this time, is it really that easy to push prices up with leverage? Where is the regulation? The safety fund is probably going to be downsized this time; next time, trading fees should be increased... Manipulation so obvious that it could withstand a crash—exchanges' risk control is quite effective.

View OriginalReply0

CodeAuditQueen

· 12-13 04:54

Typical collateral devaluation → liquidation trigger → cascade collapse. This re-entrancy attack logic has long been dismantled in DeFi. Safety fund guarantee? Honestly, it's just delaying the conflict; the protocol vulnerabilities haven't been fixed at all. This manipulation method actually stems from poor overflow checks in the lending protocol, which should have been audited long ago.

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeVictim

· 12-13 04:50

It's the same old trick... The security fund is taking the fall for these whales, outrageous OM has really been messed up this time, leverage manipulation and still refusing to admit it Why are exchanges' risk controls so weak, they have to rely on the security fund to cover losses Damn, that's why I don't touch small-cap coins, it's too easy to get farmed The security fund is bleeding again, retail investors suffer.

View OriginalReply0

TokenSherpa

· 12-13 04:43

ngl this is exactly why you gotta examine the governance precedent here... the exchange literally ate the losses instead of properly liquidating? that's not how risk management frameworks are supposed to work historically speaking

Reply0

MoonRocketman

· 12-13 04:39

The safety fund is bleeding again and again. This time, OM's trajectory calculation is clearly off the expected path. Leveraged lending pushes the market, I've seen this trick many times before. RSI should have sounded the alarm by now. Exchange losses, retail investors buying in, an eternal gravitational resistance level. This launch window was really poorly chosen. Refueling only invites trouble. Price drops off a cliff, Bollinger Bands instantly fail, whose stop-loss settings are just right? Can OM this project still break out of the atmosphere? We need to recalculate the escape velocity. The platform dug its own pit, and in the end, the fund covers the losses. The cost is a bit high.

View OriginalReply0

GigaBrainAnon

· 12-13 04:31

It's the same trick again, borrowing to pump up the price and then dumping, a classic combination to cut leeks. It's outrageous that the safety fund is paying the bill; this isn't compensating investors, it's helping the manipulators cover their tracks. OM this wave feels quite unfortunate, poor token holders. This exchange's risk control is indeed quick to respond, but the post-incident handling is a bit outrageous. The cliff-like plunge is truly shocking, it even hurts to watch. I've said it before, be cautious with large loans; this is a living example of a bad lesson.

View OriginalReply0

0xLostKey

· 12-13 04:24

It's the safety fund footing the bill again; this trick is really unstoppable. --- OM's manipulation case is hilarious. Borrowing to push the price so blatantly and still managing to succeed? --- Safety fund bears all the losses? So all the risk has been shifted onto our side. --- I just want to ask, how were those related accounts handled? Was there really accountability? --- The exchange investigated pretty quickly, but the result was still a huge loss... --- Leverage + collateral + collusion—this combo punch is indeed incredible. --- Liquidating only a small portion of collateral and calling it done? Feels not harsh enough. --- The cliff drop in OM's price was really intense; it collapsed all at once. --- The name "Safety Fund" sounds like a trash can, dumping all bad debts into it. --- So, do retail investors like us just have to accept defeat when encountering such tokens?

View OriginalReply0

Trending TopicsView More
#NonfarmDataBeats
45.71K Popularity
#HasTheMarketDipped?
106.4K Popularity
#FedRateCutPrediction
67.95K Popularity
#ETHTrendWatch
184.74K Popularity
#FHETokenExtremeVolatility
6.52K Popularity

Hot Gate FunView More

1
GWALLETGWALLET
MC:$0.1Holders:1
0.00%
2
GLCGate Lucky Cat
MC:$3.54KHolders:1
0.00%
3
PIPINPIPIN
MC:$3.61KHolders:2
0.04%
4
usdtusdt
MC:$3.56KHolders:1
0.00%
5
11
MC:$3.57KHolders:2
0.00%

Sitemap