Bybit’s $1.5 Billion Ethereum Hack Sparks Controversy: Should Ethereum Roll Back Again?

The crypto market was shaken on Friday as Bybit, one of the leading cryptocurrency exchanges, suffered a devastating hack that resulted in the loss of over 401,000 Ethereum—valued at approximately $1.5 billion. The breach has reignited an old and divisive debate: should the Ethereum blockchain be rolled back to recover lost funds?

This discussion brings back memories of the infamous 2016 DAO hack, where Ethereum developers and the community executed a hard fork to reverse the theft, restoring stolen funds but splitting the blockchain into Ethereum (ETH) and Ethereum Classic (ETC). Now, with Bybit’s massive loss, some are wondering whether a similar move should be considered again.

Bybit’s Stance and Vitalik Buterin’s Role

Bybit’s CEO, Ben Zhou, addressed the rollback question cautiously during an X Spaces discussion, stating, “I really don’t know. I’m not sure if it’s one man’s decision. Based on the spirit of the blockchain, maybe it should be a voting process to see what the community wants.”

Zhou also revealed that his team is in discussions with Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin and the Ethereum Foundation to explore potential ways to mitigate the damage. However, Ethereum’s core principles of decentralization and immutability make a rollback highly unlikely.

The Community Reacts: Arthur Hayes and the Immutability Debate

Former BitMEX CEO Arthur Hayes stirred the pot on social media, directly addressing Vitalik Buterin with a provocative question: “Will you advocate to roll back the chain to help Bybit?” In a seemingly sarcastic remark, he added, “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?”

His comments sparked a heated debate within the crypto community. Some see rollback discussions as a threat to Ethereum’s credibility, while others believe extraordinary circumstances—like a $1.5 billion exploit—could justify such measures.

Ethereum’s Structure: Why a Rollback Is Nearly Impossible

Crypto journalist Laura Shin stepped in to clarify the confusion. She explained that the term “rollback” originates from Bitcoin’s transaction model, where reversing one transaction would require undoing all subsequent transactions.

Ethereum, on the other hand, operates differently. Its blockchain updates balances through smart contracts, making an outright reversal far more complex. Instead of a true rollback, the 2016 DAO fork implemented an “irregular state change” that reassigned funds from compromised contracts without undoing the entire blockchain history.

BitGalactic’s Perspective: A Turning Point for Ethereum?

From BitGalactic’s viewpoint, this controversy underscores Ethereum’s ongoing struggle between pragmatism and ideology. The network has evolved significantly since 2016, and reversing transactions today would set a dangerous precedent, potentially undermining trust in Ethereum’s security and finality. However, with institutional money flowing into crypto and regulatory scrutiny intensifying, should Ethereum reconsider its stance on rollback mechanisms for extreme cases?

The Bybit hack serves as a stark reminder that security remains a pressing issue in crypto, and while a rollback is unlikely, this incident could spark new discussions about how the industry handles large-scale hacks in the future. Will Ethereum stand firm on immutability, or will pressure from major players force a rethink? The coming weeks will reveal whether this debate is just noise—or the beginning of a major shift in blockchain governance.