The age long practice of paying white hat bonus to hackers: A good or bad practice?

[Maxicreed01]

Records has it that almost 1 billion dollars has been stolen via security exploitation with that of HTX and the decentralized cross-chain protocol Mixin Network as the most recent. Tho, the figure may not be alarming compared to the previous year that saw almost 4 billion dollars stolen.

Most of these stolen assets were never recovered and for the few that are either recovered or returned by the hackers, were associated with a decent amount of white hat bonus payment which imho encourage the proliferation of hacking activities which will definitely slow down adoption and hamper the confidence on the safety of this industry. HTX just announced the paying 250 ETH as white hat bonus for the return of the 5k ETH recently drained from their platform which is a huge sigh and a welcome development but how will we continue to live in fear in this evolving industry?

There are few exchanges that have successfully recorded zero incidence of security exploit since inception particularly Bitget and this begs the question 'what are they doing right that others aren't doing and why is it difficult to collaborate with those secured platforms to collectively build and have secured platforms? ' cos I want to believe if these platforms are collectively secured, we could experience rapid growth that the traditional financial institution could be threatened.

[BashJasper]

I believe that in a hyper-tech world like ours today, all financial platforms ought to regularly update their security infrastructure to meet the present-day demands. That will make it more difficult for hackers to exploit the platform let alone ask for compensation for return of such.

I think platforms that have been successful this far must have made security of their platform a top priority to ward off any attempt just like you reported for Bitget and maybe Upbit