On August 19, a user on Twitter revealed the possible leakage of source code for Citibanamex, BanCoppel and Banco Sabadell mobile banking applications, evidence that created great fear among users of traditional financial institutions.
The source code of @novasolutionsys was published in a public repo.
The data allegedly came from an incorrectly configured SonarQube instance. pic.twitter.com/yn48OrtWFI
– Bank security (@Bank_Security) August 18, 2020
Bank Security, the first account to reveal details about the leak, indicated at the time that the source code had been inadvertently posted to a public repository. noting that the data came from an instance of ‘SonaQube incorrectly configured’.
After several users on the social network repeated the information disclosed by Bank Security, Citibanamex, one of the banks affected, said in an official statement that at no time had the banking systems been breached or customer information compromised.
On the other side, almost parallel, Banco Sabadell stated in its official report that there was nothing to regret after the leak and that security or customer data was not affected.
Regarding the Banco Sabadell México Mobile App source code leak that our provider Nova Solution Systems suffered from, we confirm that it does not compromise our customers’ security or data.
We will keep you informed. pic.twitter.com/w7D46tDzZD
– Banco Sabadell in Mexico (@BancoSabadellMX) 19th August 2020
Almost a week after what happened, it is still not certain what happened or why the data leaked. and the actual extent of the damage it could have caused, even if financial institutions ensure that their customers’ private data is not compromised or compromised.
There is no way to verify this, after all Traditional centralized systems do not allow transparent auditing that distributed systems could achieve. Just like it was demonstrated with blockchain technology and decentralized financial protocols.
For example, consider what recently happened to the code bug in the DeFi protocol Yam Financewhat prompted the project to ask investors who had pledged to save the platform, An example of the extent to which systems that are supported by decentralized technology make it possible to observe these types of errors quickly and transparently.
While there is no indication that the ‘supposed failure“Was the target of a malicious cyber attack. It is worth remembering that as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic Mexico has become a high risk country due to the increase in cyber attacks. in both quantity and quality, as Silikn founder Víctor Ruíz stated in an interview with Cointelegraph Español last month.
In addition to these risks, it should be remembered that theerror“They pay dearly in financial systems, but let’s see the example of Citibank and Brigade Capital trying to resolve a dispute through litigation to recover $ 175 million that was mistakenly sent to the private mutual fund.
All of the above is nothing more than a ‘ open mouth‘ from the reasons put forward by the maximalists of bitcoin and blockchain technology for the urgent need to scale the traditional financial models we currently have, to avoid at least being exposed to “bugs” that can cost end users dearly, and even more to change the mindset by which users should force these institutions to at least be more secure and transparent about disruptive technologies like blockchain.
After all Even the most powerful quantum computers from Google and Intel are far from reaching the qubits required to damage our existing decentralized platforms. Not to mention, many developers have already committed to solving this “supposed threat,” rather than just demonstrating the strength and rigidity of blockchains.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely those of author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cointelegraph. You should do your own research when making a decision.