Most often, an attack in the context of cryptocurrencies is used in a negative way: this is an attack 51%, and the attack of Sivilla, and the attack of Finnie. However, some, for example, have a “vampire attack”, have positive aspects.

What is a “vampire attack”

This is not about vampires from the novel by Bram Stoker, but about figurative images. They “suck” from their victims not blood, but customers who create liquidity. Two logical questions arise – who is attacked and who attacks?

The answer to the first of them is a platform that has established itself in the market and has an extensive client base. As a rule, this is a platform from the decentralized finance sector (Defi), which mainly depend on customers and their resources. Among them, you can note automatic market makers (AMM), decentralized exchanges (DEX) and marketplaces of non -replaceable tokens (NFT).

The “vampire” is a new project, which is similar in terms of functionality, but offers more favorable conditions for customers. Users go there due to greater potential profit or smaller costs. Thus, the new platform, as it were, sucks customers from the old by analogy with how the vampire sucks blood from the victim.

Stages of “Vampire Attack”

The first stage is the study of the market. At this stage, the choice of the victim takes place, the conditions that the platform offers are thoroughly analyzed, after which customers are offered something better. For example, individual Airdrops or lower commissions.

The next step is information about the new site is reached to consumers. For this, the platforms use fairly aggressive marketing through social networks and other methods of news distribution.

Next, the platform offers users who managed to lure, some bonuses, for example, in the form of coins. Usually, quite attractive stake stares are installed on them.

Finally, the final stage involves an increase in the client base and, as a result, the volume of trading.

“Vampire attack” in the legal and ethical field

From the point of view of the law, the “vampire attack” is not unlawful. Of course, under certain circumstances, certain code elements or unique trade strategies could be copied (stolen), but this is difficult to prove.

But from an ethical point of view, there are a number of questions to the “vampire attack”. On the one hand, confidence in a specific site is deliberately undermined, which contradicts the spirit of honest competition. On the other hand, the market is the market that if you lose to the rival in separate aspects, you can lose users. Therefore, even ethically, you can’t brand a “vampire attack” as something bad.

The pros and cons of the “vampire attack”

Although two sides are involved in the “Vampire attack”, three are felt by the effect of it: a new platform, an old platform and users. For the first “Vampire attack”, first gives positive results, allowing you to attract new customers. However, it is necessary to maintain their interest, and this does not always succeed. In this regard, most sites conducting “vampire attacks” quickly go into oblivion.

The second side is a platform-victim. It would seem that for her an obvious minus is the outflow of customers. This is so, however, there is a plus: the “Vampire attack” can force the “victim” to work on its flaws in order to return consumer demand.

Finally, the third party is users. There are practically no minuses. Competition gives rise to the best conditions, therefore, in order to seize them, you only need to keep abreast of events, and also quite mobile, because at any second more attractive aspects can be left, due to the impossibility of maintaining them on an ongoing basis. The new project can quickly capture the audience, but if it does not have long -term value, users will also go back or to the new “vampire”.

Ways to protect against the “vampire attack”

There are no ideal conditions that could not be improved at least for a short time. If we talk about minimizing the chances of the success of a “vampire attack”, then it is worth constantly holding your hand on the pulse. Each Defi platform should monitor market competitors in order to keep abreast of existing offers. Complete involvement in the user community is also necessary. This is then necessary to have feedback from customers. Well, of course, it is necessary to constantly develop: it can concern both the interface and user aspects, and improving the system of awards and rewards, so that users do not have the desire to leave.

Examples of “Vampire attack”

The most famous example is the case with Sushiswap and Uniswap in 2020. The first, being a second and carried out the “vampire attack.” Sushi tokens that users could get for the fact that they switched to this site used Sushiswap customers. In addition, if after that they sent them to stakeing, then they also laid out part of the profit from the commissions.

Thus, the use of Sushiswap was more profitable for customers compared to Uniswap. Initially, this led to the migration of billions of dollars. Uniswap clearly ended up in Knockdown, nevertheless, the knockout did not happen. In the near future, Uniswap has released its own UNI control token in order to inspire users to make a choice again in their favor, which, as a result, and It happened.

The second interesting case occurred in early 2023. Then the “Vampire attack” was carried out by the Blur NFT market for the leader of that time in the field of non-replaceable tokens-Opensea. The new platform was able to attract customers through bonuses from Airdrop. As a result, Blur is temporary went around Opensea for a trading volume.

Conclusion

“Vampire attack” is a way to lure customers with new Defi platforms in similar old ones through various bonuses and stimulation programs. It most often does not cause problems with the law, but from the perspective of ethics it is condemned by a cryptocurrency. Such attacks have both a negative effect and positive, making a stronger competition between different Defi protocols, which is poured into improved conditions for users.