CoinMarketCap has begun working with the Shiba Inu team to fix recent issues related to “wormhole” addresses. CoinMarketCap previously listed three Shibu Inu contract addresses on their official platform in a recent update.
However, the Shiba Inu community mistook the addresses as malicious, causing confusion. The company later clarified that the contract addresses are not malicious and are Wormhole addresses for SHIB to facilitate cross-chain transactions.
In an announcement on Twitter, CoinMarketCap clarified that the non-ETH contacts on this page @shibtoken are wormhole addresses, designed to facilitate cross-chain transactions of versions wrapped of this property.
Confusion
The confusion started when the official Shib account tweeted an official statement about CoinMarketCap addresses and said they were not safe to use.
The official Shibu Inu Twitter account later clarified an update on the recent CoinMarketCap crash. The SHIB said that the top crypto rating site has been in contact with the coin’s developers to resolve current issues regarding the “wormhole” address.
Earlier, the Shibu Inu community warned that three fake smart contracts on three “Ethereum killers” (Binance Smart Chain, Terra and Solana) were displayed on the “crypto front page”. Teal also clarified that any non-Ethereum address is in fact invalid because SHIB is an ERC-20 token. Tokens sent to addresses on other chains will be lost forever.
CoinMarketCap clarifies
Following this development, CoinMarketCap was quick to provide an explanation, stating that the three addresses are wormhole bridges for cross-chain transactions with wrapped versions of the token. Therefore, the mentioned addresses are not malicious and they are intended to improve the user experience.
While agreeing with the benefits of interoperability, the Shibu Inu team says there are practical problems of a “fundamental limit” to the level of security provided by such bridges.
Additionally, the Shibu Inu community criticized CoinMarketCap’s actions to make decisions about tokens in a “centralized” manner. However, it did not repeat the allegation of listing fake smart contract addresses. It also accused the company of misrepresenting the circulating supply of the cryptocurrency.