VeChain Delay Adds Another Open Crypto Gateway Issue at Coinbase
Coinbase has opened a new incident involving delayed VeChain transfers while a separate MultiversX funding problem dating back to September 19 remains unresolved, putting two blockchain-specific gateways into active investigation at the same time.
The exchange reported the VeChain problem at 00:11 PDT on September 25, saying users were experiencing delayed sends and receives of VET. Coinbase said buying and selling remained available and fiat deposits and withdrawals were unaffected. The company also said customer funds remained safe while it investigated the issue.
The wording is important. Coinbase has not described the VET incident as a security breach, a VeChain network outage or a wider failure of its trading platform. Its website, mobile application, Advanced Trade platform and major payment services were listed as operational. At this stage, the evidence supports a narrow transfer problem rather than a general Coinbase outage.
That distinction has appeared repeatedly across the crypto industry this month. Exchanges can continue trading assets internally even when the infrastructure connecting their internal ledgers to an external blockchain is unavailable. Dave Finances recently documented a similar pattern in a series of network-specific funding incidents involving Kraken, where unrelated blockchain gateways experienced disruptions while the wider exchange remained online.
The more notable part of Coinbase’s latest incident is the timing. The VET problem opened while Coinbase was still carrying an unresolved MultiversX incident that began at 01:49 PDT on September 19. That notice says some users may experience delays sending and receiving EGLD because of a MultiversX network issue. Buys, sells and fiat funding remain unaffected.
The EGLD interruption originally coincided with a much more serious event outside Coinbase. MultiversX confirmed that an attacker exploited a virtual-machine-level atomicity issue that caused invalid state changes. The network paused progression while developers and validators worked on a recovery process, eventually preparing a coordinated hard fork from a known-good checkpoint.
MultiversX has since announced that its mainnet is back online. The project said the recovery upgrade was successfully deployed, block production resumed and engineering checks were completed. It gave users an all-clear for normal network activity, while warning that individual exchanges could take additional time to restore deposits and withdrawals.
That makes Coinbase’s still-open EGLD incident more interesting than it was earlier in the week. When the underlying blockchain itself was paused, an exchange restricting transfers was an expected defensive measure. Once the network resumes and declares normal activity, the focus shifts toward how quickly each exchange can validate the recovered chain state and restore its own gateway.
Other exchanges have faced the same problem. Kraken restricted EGLD funding and trading during the MultiversX incident, an episode covered in Dave Finances’ report on EGLD restrictions at Kraken. Exchanges had to determine that the repaired network state was safe to recognize before fully reconnecting customer deposits and withdrawals.
There is currently no evidence that Coinbase’s new VeChain delay has anything to do with MultiversX. The blockchains are unrelated, and Coinbase has not identified a common technical cause. VeChain itself has not been publicly tied to the MultiversX security incident.
Still, VET has appeared in another exchange’s recent infrastructure problems. Kraken reported VeChain deposit and withdrawal delays earlier this month while dealing with several other gateway incidents, including an ERC20 withdrawal disruption alongside VeChain and MultiversX gateways. Those events were not shown to share one cause, but they illustrate how much separate blockchain infrastructure large exchanges must maintain.
Coinbase’s recent history offers another comparison. A Sui send incident opened on September 22 after some users experienced failed transfers. Coinbase identified a fix and marked the issue resolved on September 24. The company has also dealt with unrelated operational disruptions elsewhere in its product stack, including a short Coinbase service disruption that simultaneously affected DEX, Borrow and Lend earlier this month.
Why the Overlap Matters More Than a Routine VET Delay
On its own, a temporary VeChain transfer delay is not a major story. Large exchanges support dozens or hundreds of blockchain networks, and individual wallets, nodes and transaction-processing systems regularly require maintenance.
The story becomes more useful when several incidents overlap or remain open longer than expected.
A centralized exchange does not simply hold one generic pool of “crypto infrastructure.” Every supported blockchain creates another operational connection. The exchange may need nodes, RPC services, deposit monitoring, transaction indexing, wallet software, signing systems, fee-management processes and reconciliation tools. Some of those components are chain-specific. Others can be shared across multiple assets.
That is why repeated incidents should be examined carefully without assuming they are connected.
One VET delay could be routine maintenance. An EGLD restriction following a protocol exploit has an obvious external explanation. A Sui issue that is identified and fixed within two days fits another category. What investors should watch is whether Coinbase begins accumulating unresolved gateway problems across unrelated chains or repeatedly encounters delays on the same networks.
The difference between trading availability and asset mobility also matters. Coinbase users can apparently continue buying and selling VET and EGLD even while blockchain transfers are constrained. That means price exposure remains available inside the exchange, but customers may temporarily be unable to move the asset to self-custody, another venue or an on-chain application.
This separation is becoming increasingly visible across centralized exchanges. Bitget recently suspended a network-specific withdrawal route for USDC on Base while other USDC routes remained available. Binance, meanwhile, temporarily halted deposits and withdrawals during a planned wallet infrastructure upgrade while keeping trading online.
The important signal from here is duration.
If Coinbase resolves VET quickly, the incident will look like routine operational noise. If EGLD is restored shortly after MultiversX’s network recovery, that would also fit the normal process of exchanges independently validating a repaired blockchain before reconnecting funding systems.
If either incident remains unresolved for several more days, however, the questions change. Investors would want to know whether Coinbase is waiting on the blockchain, a node or custody provider, an internal wallet system, additional reconciliation checks or some other dependency.
There is no public evidence yet that Coinbase has a common infrastructure problem connecting VET, EGLD and its recently resolved Sui incident. Treating the three as one outage would therefore go beyond the facts.
But status pages become more informative when viewed as a sequence rather than one notification at a time. The next useful development is not simply another “investigating” update. It is whether Coinbase clears VET quickly, finally reopens normal EGLD transfers after MultiversX’s recovery, or adds another unrelated blockchain gateway to the list.
Johan Shamshad is a financial markets writer at Dave Finances covering cryptocurrencies, trading platforms, brokers, fintech, financial regulation, and developments across global markets. He previously worked at Gulf News, adding newsroom experience to his coverage of fast-moving financial and digital-asset markets.
His work focuses on identifying market-moving events, company developments, regulatory changes, product launches, and shifts in trading and financial infrastructure.
Johan contributes news and analysis designed to help readers understand not only what happened, but why a development matters and how it may affect the wider financial landscape.