Smart Contract Vulnerability Leads to Flash Loan Attack on Binance Smart Chain (BSC)

Introduction

Decentralized Finance (DeFi) represents one of the most innovative frontiers in blockchain technology, enabling permissionless lending, borrowing, and trading without centralized intermediaries. However, the rapid rise of DeFi has also brought heightened risks, particularly in the realm of smart contract vulnerabilities and flash loan attacks — sophisticated exploits that drain millions of dollars from protocols in a matter of seconds. In this article, we examine a notable flash loan attack on the Binance Smart Chain (BSC), its underlying smart contract vulnerability, its impact, and what the incident reveals about the state of DeFi security.

1. The Rise of Flash Loan Attacks in DeFi

Flash loans are a novel financial primitive in DeFi — instant, uncollateralized loans that must be borrowed and repaid in a single blockchain transaction. Originally designed to offer arbitrage opportunities and more efficient capital utilization, flash loans have become a powerful tool for attackers when paired with poorly secured smart contracts. changelly.com+1

Attackers take out enormous amounts of funds, manipulate pricing mechanisms or exploit business logic flaws, and then repay the loan — all within the same transaction block — leaving the protocol with losses and no collateral to cover them.

2. Case Study: NGP Protocol Flash Loan Exploit on BSC (2025)

One of the clearest recent examples of such an exploit occurred in September 2025 when the New Gold Protocol (NGP) — a DeFi platform operating on Binance Smart Chain (BSC) — suffered a flash loan attack that drained approximately $2 million due to a smart contract vulnerability. Bitget+1

2.1 What Happened?

According to blockchain security firms monitoring the incident:

• Attackers took out a large flash loan to manipulate the price of the NGP token.
• They performed a massive swap that artificially inflated USDT reserves and deflated NGP reserves in the token’s liquidity pool.
• This caused the on-chain price oracle — which the smart contract relied on — to report a very low price for NGP.
• The exploit enabled the attackers to bypass the contract’s transaction limits and acquire large amounts of NGP tokens at significantly undervalued prices.
• After repaying the flash loan within the same transaction, the attackers walked away with roughly $2 million in profit. Bitget+1

On-chain analytics confirmed that much of the stolen funds were then funneled through Tornado Cash, a cryptocurrency mixing service used to obscure the origin of assets — a common laundering technique in DeFi hacks. Bitget

3. Understanding the Vulnerability

At the heart of the exploit was a smart contract vulnerability tied to the price oracle logic — specifically, relying exclusively on liquidity pool reserves from a single decentralized exchange (DEX) without safeguards against manipulation.

3.1 Price Oracle Dependence on Manipulable Data

The NGP smart contract’s getPrice() function calculated token prices by referencing the state of a PancakeSwap V2 pool. This design had two critical flaws:

1. Single Source of Truth: By trusting only one liquidity pool’s reserves, the oracle became susceptible to manipulation when those reserves were distorted.
2. Lack of External Safeguards: There were no fallback mechanisms like time-weighted average price or external oracle feeds (e.g., Chainlink) that could provide more resistant pricing data. QuillAudits

During the flash loan attack, the attacker’s huge temporary liquidity shift drastically changed the reserve ratios — tricking the contract into believing that NGP was worth far less than its real market value.

3.2 Flawed Fee and Transfer Logic

Additionally, certain aspects of the contract’s fee and transfer logic exacerbated the vulnerability:

• Sales fees were deducted incorrectly, directly affecting the pool’s available reserves rather than being applied after the completion of a trade.
• Certain state-synchronization calls (sync()) post-fee deduction further disrupted the pool balances when used alongside manipulated reserves. QuillAudits

This confluence of factors transformed a temporary flash loan swap into a persistent price distortion that the contract could not defend against.

4. The Anatomy of a Flash Loan Attack

Flash loan attacks typically follow a similar pattern:

1. Borrow Large Funds: The attacker takes out a flash loan of significant liquidity from a lending pool or DEX.
2. Manipulate Market Conditions: They use this capital to manipulate the price of a targeted asset or to exploit an algorithmic imbalance.
3. Trigger Vulnerability: The manipulated state triggers logic in the smart contract (e.g., mispriced oracle, faulty validation, or unchecked arithmetic).
4. Reap Profits: The attacker drains excess assets, repays the flash loan, and pockets the difference — all within one block. changelly.com

This sequence can happen in mere seconds on blockchain networks like BSC.

5. Broader Context: BSC and Flash Loan Prevalence

The NGP attack is not an isolated incident. Binance Smart Chain has been repeatedly targeted by flash loan exploits:

• In 2021, the Bogged Finance protocol lost approximately $3 million in a flash loan exploit that dramatically crashed its native token price. Cointelegraph+1
• BurgerSwap suffered a $7.2 million loss after attackers created fake tokens and manipulated trading pair reserves. CoinGape
• Belt Finance’s flash loan exploit led to losses over $6.3 million, after an incorrect share valuation mechanism was exploited. Vidma

These and other incidents underscore a pattern: DeFi protocols on BSC are frequent targets for complex financial exploits — often rooted in inadequate smart contract design or naïve oracle implementation. CoinGape

6. Impact on Users and the Ecosystem

The consequences of flash loan attacks extend well beyond financial losses for a single protocol:

6.1 Financial Losses and Token Volatility

After the NGP attack, the value of the NGP token plummeted nearly 88% as confidence in the protocol evaporated. Bitget Similar price crashes have followed flash loan exploits on other platforms, destroying liquidity and eroding user trust.

6.2 Erosion of Confidence in DeFi

Repeated exploits contribute to broader skepticism toward newer or smaller DeFi platforms, especially those with minimal audits or limited security resources. Retail traders often bear the brunt as they lose funds or experience steep price downturns.

6.3 Regulatory and Compliance Concerns

Flash loan attacks attract regulatory scrutiny, as they highlight systemic weaknesses in market infrastructure and raise questions about investor protection in largely unregulated spaces.

7. Lessons Learned and Best Practices

The NGP and related flash loan incidents illustrate key lessons for DeFi developers and investors:

7.1 Secure Oracle Design

Smart contracts should avoid relying solely on manipulable price sources. Instead:

• Use decentralized oracle networks (e.g., Chainlink, Band Protocol).
• Employ time-weighted averages, which smooth out short-term price fluctuations caused by flash loans. Outlook India

7.2 Thorough Security Audits

Before deployment, protocols must undergo rigorous audits by reputable firms. Audits that examine logic flaws, event sequences, and edge conditions help identify potential exploit vectors.

7.3 Multi-Layered Risk Controls

Implement additional security controls:

• Maximum slippage limits
• Transaction throttling
• Multi-sig governance for admin functions

These add resilience against sudden, exploitative transactions.

7.4 Continuous Monitoring and Response

Real-time monitoring tools can flag unusual activity, enabling faster incident response and mitigation before irreversible damage occurs.

8. The Future of DeFi Security

The increasing sophistication of DeFi attacks — particularly flash loan exploits — highlights the ongoing arms race between protocol developers and malicious actors.

Researchers are actively exploring advanced detection and prevention tools that analyze smart contracts for vulnerabilities before deployment or detect suspicious transactions on-chain in real time. Academic work like SMARTCAT demonstrates how bytecode analysis can preemptively identify contracts likely to be used in price manipulation attacks. arXiv

Meanwhile, the industry is moving toward secure composability, better standards for oracle integration, and shared security best practices that prioritize safety over rapid growth.

Sorce Binance