
Why PaperTrade Says a Transferable PAPER Token Would Invite a Lucrative Attack
PaperTrade, a perpetual protocol, was forced to postpone the transferability of its PAPER token after an initial attack. A trader manipulated the ETH price on Hyperliquid (the oracle for PaperTrade) while simultaneously taking short positions on Paper Trade. The team had to manually block the positions – a sign that the protocol is not fully decentralized (2-of-3 multi-sig).
The Decision Against Transferable TokensIn a statement, PaperTrade explained: If the token were tradable now, a financially viable attack would be possible. Example: With a $10 million pool, an attacker could spend $15 million on price manipulation – and then earn $50 million through short selling on the perp market. The risk is existential.
Controversy and Criticism- Previous Announcement: The roadmap explicitly promised that PAPER would eventually be transferable. Many users invested in the protocol to earn this token – they even had to deliberately lose money to farm PAPER.
- Current U-Turn: The team now says the token will remain non-tradable for the foreseeable future. Critics accuse the team of changing the rules after the fact – not a classic rug pull, but a disappointment for the community.
- Limited Solutions: Possible safeguards (capping pool size or leverage) would undermine Paper Trade's very purpose (extreme leverage, casino-style gambling).
The analysts in the transcript are divided: On one hand, the risk analysis is correct – a transferable token would almost certainly invite existential attacks. On the other hand, the team should have communicated the implications upfront, before users invested money.
Source: Excerpt from Unchained with Laura Shin.






