Agree. Yeah the thing is that exchanges aren't incentivized to police these oracle attacks b/c it actually brings much-needed/sorely-missed spot volume to their own venue (while they can argue the loss occurs on the derivatives exchanges). So only industry-pressure would do it.
Conversation
Oracles are only responsible for reporting the truth, not for controlling events or even what people do with the truth. To spot exchanges, the behavior is neither good nor bad. A robust index, like is much less vulnerable to being influenced by a market anomaly.
2
3
21
So, it is not so much an attack on the oracle as it is the exploitation of a naive counter party. The sucker accepted an unknown, variable price, which turns out could, under the terms, be set by the other contract participant. Oops. Not the oracle's fault.
1
1
21
The answer is no
2
7
Depends on the circumstances. If there was an actual malfunction, yes. But if the markets are just inefficient because some large prop firm randomly shut down, and you think there’s such a sweet arb opportunity lying around, why complain to kraken? Go ahead and take it
2
11
The exchange is not responsible for the price whatsoever. The exchange's responsibility is to match orders. The "price" (bid, ask, last trade, whatever) is set by the market participants, not the exchange. So, if the tech is working properly, the exchange is never responsible.
1
1
12
I would ask you which price you're referring to (bid, ask, last trade, other) but yes, we generally don't interfere with the forces of the free market. Liquidations would be processed according to the terms. There's an argument for spot margin exchanges using indexes as well.


