On January 2025, IPC Incorrect burn pairs was exploited in a business logic flaw, resulting in approximately $590K in losses. That makes the IPC Incorrect burn pairs exploit the 111th largest DeFi incident out of 690 documented in our archive.
Attack Mechanics: How the IPC Incorrect burn pairs Business Logic Flaw Played Out
Exploit Class Applied to IPC Incorrect burn pairs
The IPC Incorrect burn pairs incident on January 7, 2025 is classified as a Business Logic Flaw. A business-logic bug in the contract — such as an incorrect formula or missing state update — lets the attacker withdraw more than their share. In the full archive, IPC Incorrect burn pairs is 1 of 144 documented business logic flaw incidents.
IPC Incorrect burn pairs in Context
At $590K, the IPC Incorrect burn pairs exploit is a minor (<$1M) event compared to the largest same-class incident in our archive — – EulerFinance (2023) at $200M.
Prior Business Logic Flaw Before IPC Incorrect burn pairs
The nearest business logic flaw incident before IPC Incorrect burn pairs was Mosca, 1 day earlier on January 6, 2025 ($19K lost). The same exploit class surfaced again within the business logic flaw attack surface.
IPC Incorrect burn pairs Vulnerability Signature
The primary source categorises the IPC Incorrect burn pairs exploit specifically as “Logic Flaw”. This narrower label is entity-specific: it reflects how the IPC Incorrect burn pairs contract failed, rather than the broad business logic flaw pattern alone.
Impact & Recovery for IPC Incorrect burn pairs
IPC Incorrect burn pairs Loss Figure
The IPC Incorrect burn pairs exploit caused $590,000 in losses — a minor (<$1M) incident and the 19th largest of 96 documented in 2025.
Where IPC Incorrect burn pairs Sits Among Business Logic Flaw Attacks
Ranked by loss size, IPC Incorrect burn pairs is the 21st largest of 144 business logic flaw incidents documented. That puts the IPC Incorrect burn pairs loss below the class average of $6.08M.
Timeline Since the IPC Incorrect burn pairs Incident
The IPC Incorrect burn pairs exploit occurred 1.3 years ago (462 days). The contract, its fork-block, and the attack transaction remain on-chain and forensically reproducible.
Primary Reference for IPC Incorrect burn pairs
Public post-mortem / on-chain analysis for the IPC Incorrect burn pairs incident: view source.
FAQ
How much did IPC Incorrect burn pairs lose?
The IPC Incorrect burn pairs exploit in January 2025 resulted in $590,000 in losses — the 19th largest of 96 DeFi incidents that year.
When did the IPC Incorrect burn pairs hack happen?
The IPC Incorrect burn pairs exploit was recorded on January 7, 2025 — 462 days ago.
What type of exploit hit IPC Incorrect burn pairs?
The IPC Incorrect burn pairs incident is classified as a Business Logic Flaw. A business-logic bug in the contract — such as an incorrect formula or missing state update — lets the attacker withdraw more than their share.
How common is the Business Logic Flaw pattern seen at IPC Incorrect burn pairs?
Our archive contains 144 documented business logic flaw incidents. The IPC Incorrect burn pairs incident is one of them.
How does IPC Incorrect burn pairs compare to the largest Business Logic Flaw attack?
The largest business logic flaw incident in our archive is – EulerFinance (2023) at $200M. The IPC Incorrect burn pairs loss is $590K.
Are there differences in SRQ between Italy and Germany after the directive?
The study explores SRQ differences, aiming to assess impacts of the directive in both countries.
How has the feedback effect been empirically observed in acquisition decisions?
Acquisitions are more likely to be canceled when prices react more negatively to their announcements.