High risk — governance crisis confirmed centralized coercion by founding team in April 2026; combined with supply chain exploit history and novel untested mechanisms at $5.3B FDV
Risk Breakdown
Top Risks
Supply chain attack in 2024 resulted in $28M stolen from 32 holders via malicious PyPI package, with a former employee implicated — demonstrating insider threat risk and weak software supply chain controls
Proof of Authority consensus confirmed as a coercion mechanism: in April 2026, co-founder Jacob Steeves was accused of controlling 38 of 41 network upgrades and using token sales to economically coerce Covenant AI into compliance — demonstrating that Foundation control extends to active suppression of dissenting subnet developers, not merely theoretical centralization risk
Yuma consensus and Taoflow emission models are novel, untested mechanisms for scoring AI work quality and allocating emissions — custom formulas with no precedent or battle-testing at this scale
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Bittensor safe to use?
What are the main risks of using Bittensor?
What is Bittensor's risk score breakdown?
How does Bittensor compare to other L1 protocols?
Has Bittensor ever been hacked or exploited?
Incident History
Get risk alerts before it's too late
Weekly grade changes, downgrade alerts, and new protocol risk findings. Free.