Sixteen major blockchains can actively freeze user funds through built-in mechanisms that allow foundations to blacklist addresses and halt transactions without user consent, as detailed in Bybit’s Lazarus Security Lab research released on November 12, 2025. This capability challenges the core principle of decentralization in cryptocurrency networks.
-
Sixteen blockchains currently enable fund freezing via hardcoded lists, configuration files, or smart contracts.
-
Nineteen additional networks, including several in the Cosmos ecosystem, could activate similar features with minimal code changes.
-
Real-world uses include freezing over $700 million in stolen assets across incidents like the Sui Cetus hack and BNB Chain bridge exploit, preventing further losses but raising centralization concerns.
Discover which blockchains can freeze user funds and the implications for crypto decentralization. Bybit’s report reveals 16 networks with freezing powers—learn the methods, incidents, and risks to safeguard your assets today.
What Are Fund Freezing Capabilities in Blockchains?
Fund freezing capabilities in blockchains refer to protocol-level mechanisms that allow network foundations or validators to blacklist specific addresses, preventing them from initiating transactions and effectively locking associated assets. These features, identified in Bybit’s Lazarus Security Lab analysis of 166 networks, enable rapid response to security threats like hacks but introduce centralized controls that contradict cryptocurrency’s foundational promise of censorship resistance. As of November 12, 2025, 16 blockchains actively deploy such tools, while 19 others remain one minor update away from implementation.
How Do Blockchains Implement Freezing Mechanisms?
Bybit’s research outlines three primary methods for implementing fund freezing, each designed to restrict malicious actors while maintaining network functionality. Hardcoded freezing integrates blacklists directly into the blockchain’s core code, making them publicly verifiable on platforms like GitHub; this approach is used by BNB Chain, VeChain, Chiliz, Viction, and XDC Network. Configuration-based freezing relies on private validator configurations, where foundations maintain hidden blacklist files accessible only to node operators, employed by networks such as Sui, Aptos, Harmony, Supra, EOS, Oasis, WAX, and Waves.
The third method, utilized exclusively by Huobi ECO Chain, leverages on-chain smart contracts to manage and enforce blacklists dynamically. In all cases, these mechanisms block affected addresses from signing or broadcasting transactions, rendering private keys ineffective against protocol overrides. Supporting data from the report indicates that such features have been instrumental in past incidents, with foundations reporting successful containment of exploits totaling over $700 million in potential losses.
Source: Bybit
Real-World Examples of Blockchain Fund Freezing
Blockchain fund freezing has been deployed in several high-profile security incidents, demonstrating both its effectiveness and the ethical dilemmas it poses. In May 2025, the Sui network froze approximately $162 million following the Cetus decentralized exchange hack, later securing 90.9% governance approval to redistribute recovered funds to affected users. Similarly, BNB Chain activated its hardcoded blacklisting in October 2022 after a $570 million bridge exploit, restricting the attacker’s access to only $100-110 million of the total.
VeChain established an early precedent in December 2019 by blacklisting 469 addresses linked to a $6.6 million theft from its buyback wallet. Aptos, observing Sui’s response, integrated freezing capabilities just one month later, highlighting a trend of reactive centralization among peer networks. These interventions, as documented in Bybit’s comprehensive review, underscore how foundations prioritize asset recovery over absolute decentralization during crises.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which Blockchains Currently Possess Active Fund Freezing Abilities?
Sixteen blockchains, including BNB Chain, Sui, Aptos, VeChain, EOS, and Waves, maintain active fund freezing through hardcoded, configuration-based, or smart contract methods, according to Bybit’s Lazarus Security Lab analysis of 166 networks conducted in 2025. This enables foundations to swiftly address threats like hacks by blacklisting addresses and halting transactions.
What Risks Do Fund Freezing Capabilities Pose to Crypto Users?
Fund freezing capabilities can undermine user trust by allowing network operators to override transaction autonomy, potentially exposing assets to centralized intervention during emergencies or disputes. While they enhance security against exploits, as seen in recoveries exceeding $700 million, they challenge decentralization ideals and may invite regulatory scrutiny for resembling traditional banking controls.
Key Takeaways
- Prevalent Freezing Across Networks: Sixteen established blockchains deploy freezing mechanisms, with 19 more in the Cosmos ecosystem like Arbitrum and Celestia poised for easy activation, expanding potential centralization risks.
- Security vs. Decentralization Tension: Features have recovered over $700 million in hacks, but grant foundations bank-like authority, conflicting with cryptocurrency’s censorship-resistant ethos.
- Strategic User Considerations: Traders should evaluate network governance and freezing policies before allocating funds, prioritizing truly permissionless chains to mitigate override threats.
Conclusion
The Bybit Lazarus Security Lab’s revelation of fund freezing capabilities in blockchains highlights a critical evolution in network design, where security imperatives increasingly intersect with blockchain centralization risks. As detailed in the November 12, 2025 report, these tools have proven vital in containing exploits but prompt users to reassess the decentralization of their chosen platforms. Moving forward, the crypto industry must navigate this tradeoff thoughtfully to foster sustainable growth and maintain investor confidence.
