# $FEFER Social Sentiment & Intelligence — 2026-08-04 19:50 UTC

> **Asset:** $FEFER  
> **Momentum Status:** Cooling Down  
> **Timestamp:** 2026-08-04 19:50 UTC (2026-08-04T19:50:00Z)  
> **Canonical URL:** https://cryptitalk.com/2026-08-04-19-50/crypto/FEFER  
> **Overview Brief:** https://cryptitalk.com/2026-08-04-19-50/crypto.md  

---

## 10-Minute Social Metrics
- **Posts Analyzed:** 1
- **Total Impressions:** 454
- **Likes:** 35
- **Retweets:** 10
- **Comments:** 7

---


## Momentum & Sentiment Analysis
Total Engagement - Comments: 7, Retweets: 10, Likes: 35, Impressions: 454


---

## Cited Community Posts & Evidence


### Post #1 by @1440000bytes
> **Author:** [@1440000bytes](https://x.com/1440000bytes)  
> **Metrics:** 51 likes · 10 retweets · 3 comments · 2.4K views  


> **Source Link:** [https://x.com/1440000bytes/status/2084597884729844222](https://x.com/1440000bytes/status/2084597884729844222)  


> **Visual Context:** A terminal screenshot showing a successful Rust test execution for `poc_no_attestation`, which demonstrates that Bitkey's "WSM integrity" check is merely a signature verification rather than a true attestation, allowing a compromised integrity key (held by Block) to sign arbitrary server keys and bypass security checks. The test output displays key hashes, signature verification results showing "ACCEPTED" for the attacker's key and "REJECTED" for non-integrity signers, supporting the claim that Block could exploit this flaw to steal funds from Bitkey's inheritance feature.  

> 
> "These PoCs prove that 'block' can steal your funds from bitkey if inheritance feaature is used.

I will write a detailed substack post. However, I'm travelling for the next 2 days and won't have the laptop with me."




---


## Contributing Accounts

- `@Stable_zh` (https://x.com/Stable_zh)