random

Bounce

2026

Zilliqa

<ul><li><strong>ZIL bounced off its July 22 low near $0.0023, though it stays below both its 50 and 200 EMAs.</strong></li><li><strong>The bounce follows a 17% weekly drop tied to a signature flaw in Zilliqa’s Ledger wallet app.</strong></li><li><strong>Wallets that signed five or more native transactions through the app should be treated as compromised.</strong></li><li><strong>Zilliqa’s native transaction halt won’t lift until a recovery plan for exposed keys is ready.</strong></li></ul><p>ZIL is trading off its lows this week, bouncing from a July 22 low near $0.0023 back toward $0.0025. Price still sits below both its 50-period and 200-period EMAs, and the reason ZIL fell in the first place hasn’t gone away. Zilliqa suspended every native, non-EVM transaction on its blockchain on July 22 after engineers traced suspicious on-chain activity to a flaw inside the Ledger app used to sign transactions on its base layer. The bug sat in code dating back to 2019, and it let anyone watching the public blockchain reconstruct a wallet’s private key once that wallet had signed roughly five native transactions.<strong><a href="https://www.upbit.com/service_center/notice?id=469118962&amp;=&amp;view=share" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow"> Upbit designated ZIL a cautionary asset</a></strong>and paused deposits and withdrawals, warning of possible delisting if the issue isn’t resolved by August. The halt, and the exposed keys it was meant to protect, are still unresolved.</p><h2 id="strong-from-a-quiet-signal-to-a-full-network-halt-strong"><strong>From a Quiet Signal to a Full Network Halt</strong></h2><p>Zilliqa’s monitoring systems picked up unusual, targeted transaction patterns on July 19. The exchange <strong><a href="https://www.kucoin.com/news/insight/ZIL/6a61016389782400071e4a67" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">KuCoin flagged the issue</a></strong>, pulled affected private keys from data already public on-chain, and helped confirm exploitation was underway. By July 20, Zilliqa ruled out any problem on the exchange side and disclosed that ZIL had been stolen from a partner exchange’s cold wallet. The root cause landed a day later: the signing code inside the Ledger app, not the blockchain or the hardware itself.</p><div style="overflow-x: auto; margin: 20px 0;"><table style="width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; min-width: 480px;"><thead><tr style="background: linear-gradient(135deg, #0b3d2e, #145c45); color: #ffffff;"><th style="padding: 10px 14px; text-align: left;">Date</th><th style="padding: 10px 14px; text-align: left;">Development</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr style="background-color: #eef7f3;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">July 19, 2026</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Zilliqa detects on-chain activity consistent with active exploitation</td></tr><tr style="background-color: #ffffff;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">July 20, 2026</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Zilliqa confirms a cold-wallet theft at a partner exchange and asks exchanges to pause ZIL activity</td></tr><tr style="background-color: #eef7f3;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">July 21, 2026</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Root cause isolated to the Ledger app’s nonce-handling code, unrelated to the chain or hardware</td></tr><tr style="background-color: #ffffff;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">July 22, 2026</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Zilliqa suspends all native (non-EVM) transactions network-wide</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="strong-five-signatures-are-enough-to-solve-for-a-private-key-strong"><strong>Five Signatures Are Enough to Solve for a Private Key</strong></h2><p>Zilliqa’s native transactions use Schnorr signatures, which need a private key plus a fresh, random number called an ephemeral nonce for every signature. <strong><a href="https://x.com/zilliqa/status/2079847348780536050" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">Zilliqa’s own postmortem</a></strong> said the app’s flawed randomness leaves a pattern across multiple signatures, turning the relationship between them into a solvable equation. One signature reveals nothing.</p><blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Nonce-Generation Vulnerability in the Zilliqa Ledger App: A critical vulnerability has been identified in the Zilliqa Ledger application affecting the generation of Schnorr signatures for native (non-EVM) Zilliqa transactions. The vulnerability causes signatures to be generated… <a href="https://t.co/sudV7WA3TV" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">https://t.co/sudV7WA3TV</a></p><p>— Zilliqa (@zilliqa) <a href="https://x.com/zilliqa/status/2079847348780536050?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">July 22, 2026</a></p></blockquote><p>Five signatures from the same flawed app hand over enough data to work backward to the private key, and none of that requires touching the physical device, only reading a blockchain that’s public by design. Transactions signed through MetaMask or another EVM-compatible wallet use standard Ethereum-style ECDSA signing instead, a separate code path unaffected by the bug.</p><h2 id="strong-why-zilliqa-can-t-just-tell-users-to-move-their-coins-strong"><strong>Why Zilliqa Can’t Just Tell Users to Move Their Coins</strong></h2><p>A standard “move your funds to safety” instruction assumes the destination is safer than the origin. Here the exposure lives in the signature history itself. Any account that broadcast five or more native transactions through the buggy app already sits on a private key an attacker can calculate from public data, patch or no patch. Sending a rescue transaction from that same key, once native transfers resume, would be visible to bots scanning the chain for exactly this activity, and a fast enough bot could front-run it before confirmation. That risk is why Zilliqa kept the network halted while it finalizes a recovery plan for exposed balances.</p><h2 id="strong-a-bounce-that-hasn-t-changed-the-trend-strong"><strong>A Bounce That Hasn’t Changed the Trend</strong></h2><p>Price spiked to roughly $0.0028 before settling at $0.002502 as of 16:01 UTC on July 23, a clear bounce off the July 22 low near $0.0023. It still trades below both its 50-period EMA ($0.002664) and its 200-period EMA ($0.002941), and both averages keep sloping downward, the signature of a trend that hasn’t turned. A moving average above price and trending down typically acts as resistance, so ZIL needs to reclaim that zone and hold there before this becomes more than an oversold bounce.</p><p><img class="alignnone wp-image-402121 size-full" src="https://ethnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/zilusdt-tradingview-23-07-2026.jpg" alt="ZILUSDT chart from Tradingview (23.07.2026)" width="1280" height="740"></p><p>RSI backs the bounce read more than a reversal. It fell close to 20 during the sharpest leg of the sell-off, a level that usually marks a market that sold off faster than the news justified, and it has since climbed to 41.97, above its own moving average of 37.05. That points to fading downside momentum without confirming a change in direction.</p><div style="overflow-x: auto; margin: 20px 0;"><table style="width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; min-width: 480px;"><thead><tr style="background: linear-gradient(135deg, #0b3d2e, #145c45); color: #ffffff;"><th style="padding: 10px 14px; text-align: left;">Indicator</th><th style="padding: 10px 14px; text-align: left;">Reading</th><th style="padding: 10px 14px; text-align: left;">What it suggests</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr style="background-color: #eef7f3;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Price (4H, Binance)</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">$0.002502</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Bounced off the recent low, still range-bound</td></tr><tr style="background-color: #ffffff;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">50 EMA</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">$0.002664</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Above price, sloping down, first resistance</td></tr><tr style="background-color: #eef7f3;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">200 EMA</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">$0.002941</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Confirms the broader trend hasn’t reversed yet</td></tr><tr style="background-color: #ffffff;"><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">RSI (14)</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">41.97</td><td style="padding: 10px 14px;">Recovering from near 20, still under the neutral 50 line</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="strong-the-bigger-cost-zilliqa-s-institutional-timeline-strong"><strong>The Bigger Cost: Zilliqa’s Institutional Timeline</strong></h2><p>Zilliqa spent 2026 building credential infrastructure meant to position the network as a compliance-ready settlement layer, with live regulated enterprise transaction flows planned for the third quarter. Institutional partners weighing that kind of integration care about predictable uptime and certified custody above almost everything else. A network halt undercuts the first assumption, and a bug traced to a partner exchange’s cold storage undercuts the second, without the blockchain itself failing.</p><h2 id="strong-what-happens-once-native-transactions-restart-strong"><strong>What Happens Once Native Transactions Restart</strong></h2><p>Zilliqa has prepared a corrected Ledger app build with Ledger, though a patch only stops new exposure. It can’t retroactively protect keys already exposed through past transactions, which is why a recovery plan for those balances is still being finalized. This kind of narrow, seven-year-old vendor bug is already feeding arguments that networks should lean on standardized EVM/ECDSA signing or audited multi-party computation instead of bespoke wallet software for signature schemes few other chains use. Whether Zilliqa’s Q3 institutional launch survives its original schedule depends on how fast that recovery plan clears review, and on whether exchanges reopen ZIL activity before or after native transactions resume, a sequencing question nobody has answered yet.</p><p>The post <a href="https://ethnews.com/zil-price-bounces-off-lows-as-zilliqas-ledger-crisis-lingers/" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">ZIL Price Bounces Off Lows as Zilliqa’s Ledger Crisis Lingers</a> appeared first on <a href="https://ethnews.com" rel="noopener noreferrer nofollow">ETHNews</a>.</p>

ZIL Price Bounces Off Lows as Zilliqa’s Ledger Crisis Lingers

Table of Contents

ETHNews

Other articles published on Jul 23, 2026

What is BlackRock's BUIDL Fund on Avalanche AVAX?

Which Crypto Companies and Protocols Make The Most Money?

REAL Joins Blockchain for Europe to Shape EU Tokenisation Rules

Insights from CoinGecko's Q2 Crypto Report

Will Robinhood Chain Push ETH's Price to All Time Highs?

Grayscale Picks Its Most Promising Tokenization Blockchains

Join our free newsletter for daily crypto updates!