Bitget has suspended USDC withdrawals through Solana, extending a recent run of wallet-maintenance interruptions affecting the stablecoin across several blockchain networks and adding another outage to the exchange’s history with the same Solana-USDC withdrawal route.
The exchange announced the suspension at 16:37 UTC on October 17, saying USDC withdrawals through Solana were being disabled because of wallet maintenance. Bitget did not provide an estimated reopening time, saying instead that the resumption date would be announced separately.
As of the latest Bitget announcement feed reviewed after the suspension, no USDC-Solana reopening notice had been published.
The restriction is specific to USDC withdrawals over Solana. Bitget has not announced a platform-wide suspension of USDC withdrawals, nor has it said that USDC trading or withdrawals through every supported blockchain are unavailable.
Solana Shows No Matching Network Outage
There is no public evidence that a Solana-wide network failure forced Bitget to suspend the route.
Solana’s official status page reported no incidents on October 17 and showed its Mainnet Beta cluster and RPC infrastructure operating normally. The status history also showed no reported network incident during the preceding several days.
That does not establish exactly what went wrong inside Bitget. An exchange can experience problems with its own Solana node infrastructure, custody systems, transaction construction, signing process, hot-wallet liquidity or other internal components even when the underlying blockchain remains healthy.
But the absence of a corresponding Solana incident makes it important not to characterize the October 17 restriction as a blockchain outage. Bitget itself gave only “wallet maintenance” as the explanation.
This Is Not the First Bitget USDC-Solana Suspension
The same asset-network combination has been suspended several times this year.
On September 16 at 20:45 UTC, Bitget halted USDC withdrawals through Solana for wallet maintenance and said the reopening time would be announced later. The exchange restored the route at 04:03 UTC on September 17, producing an interruption of approximately seven hours and 18 minutes.
There were earlier examples as well. Bitget suspended USDC-Solana withdrawals on May 18 at 00:36 UTC and restored them at 02:31 UTC, about one hour and 55 minutes later.
A longer interruption started on June 23 at 02:45 UTC. The route did not reopen until 03:20 UTC on June 24, approximately 24 hours and 35 minutes later.
Those earlier notices also cited wallet maintenance. Bitget has not publicly established that the May, June, September and October interruptions resulted from the same technical problem.
That caveat is important. Repeated maintenance on one route demonstrates repeated unavailability, but it does not prove a recurring defect without technical information from the exchange.
USDC Maintenance Has Recently Spread Across Several Networks
The October 17 Solana restriction also follows a concentrated series of USDC withdrawal interruptions across Bitget’s other supported blockchains.
On October 12, Bitget temporarily suspended USDC withdrawals through Arbitrum One. The following day brought wallet-maintenance notices for USDC on Ethereum, Polygon and Optimism.
The most unusual sequence occurred on Optimism. Bitget initially suspended that route on October 13 and reopened it the following morning. Just 14 hours and 26 minutes later, the exchange shut it again. Dave Finances subsequently reported how Bitget reopened USDC withdrawals on Optimism before suspending the same route again.
The second Optimism interruption lasted until October 15 at 10:49 UTC.
Polygon also underwent a roughly 10-hour-and-43-minute USDC withdrawal interruption between October 13 and October 14, while the Ethereum maintenance event on October 13 was much shorter.
Taken together, the notices establish a pattern of repeated USDC network-specific maintenance. They do not establish a single shared failure across Ethereum, Arbitrum, Polygon, Optimism and Solana.
The Timing Keeps Attention on Bitget’s Wallet Infrastructure
The interruptions are receiving additional scrutiny because they follow Bitget’s September security incident, in which approximately $387.5 million in assets were ultimately identified as affected.
Bitget later said a critical backend wallet system had been compromised. According to the exchange’s preliminary explanation, attackers manipulated transaction information entering its authorization process rather than obtaining the private keys themselves.
The company subsequently rebuilt and restored withdrawal services in stages. Bitcoin came first, followed by a broader rollout in which Ethereum withdrawals were restored across multiple blockchain networks.
Stablecoins were an important part of that recovery. Bitget later reopened USDT withdrawals following additional security checks as it worked toward restoring the full withdrawal system.
There is no evidence currently connecting the October 17 Solana maintenance, or the recent USDC restrictions on other networks, to the September breach. The exchange has not made that connection, and the maintenance notices do not describe security incidents.
Still, the recent breach makes wallet reliability a more consequential issue for users than routine maintenance would normally be.
The Real Question Is Whether These Networks Share Infrastructure
An exchange supporting USDC on five different chains does not necessarily operate five completely independent withdrawal systems.
Some components are network-specific: Solana and Ethereum, for example, require different transaction formats, node infrastructure and blockchain integrations.
Other components can be shared. An exchange may use common custody policies, transaction-approval systems, accounting infrastructure, withdrawal risk controls, orchestration software or operational procedures across several networks.
That is why the latest sequence presents two very different possible interpretations.
The benign explanation is that Bitget is carrying out unrelated maintenance on several individual wallet integrations. Large exchanges routinely maintain dozens or hundreds of asset-network combinations, and seeing multiple temporary suspensions does not automatically imply a larger failure.
The more concerning possibility would be that the repeated USDC restrictions are symptoms of a shared operational dependency that is repeatedly requiring intervention. There is currently no evidence sufficient to establish that.
What would clarify the issue is technical disclosure from Bitget explaining whether the recent USDC interruptions involve common custody infrastructure, common wallet software or entirely independent network-specific maintenance.
Repeated Route Availability Matters Even Without Lost Funds
There is no indication in the October 17 notice that customer USDC balances are missing or that funds have been lost. The immediate issue is access to one withdrawal path.
For active traders, however, network choice can matter substantially.
A customer holding USDC may specifically want Solana because the funds are intended for a Solana wallet, decentralized exchange, lending protocol or other application. Being able to withdraw the same token over another network does not necessarily solve that problem without introducing another exchange, bridge or conversion step.
This makes reliability at the asset-network level more important than a simple platform-wide measure of whether “withdrawals are working.”
The October 17 suspension is especially notable because the same Solana-USDC route has now experienced several documented wallet-maintenance interruptions, while USDC withdrawals on other Bitget networks have also been switched off and restored repeatedly during October.
None of that proves a common technical fault, and there is no evidence of a Solana network outage behind the latest restriction.
But it does create a clear operational question for Bitget: are these simply independent maintenance windows across a large multi-chain wallet estate, or is some shared part of the exchange’s stablecoin withdrawal infrastructure producing repeated availability problems?
The next useful data point will be how quickly Solana-USDC withdrawals return this time — and whether another USDC network requires maintenance soon afterward.
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. You can reach out to him via his social media accounts:
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/johan-shamshad-742851262/
X: https://x.com/Yasmine_FX
Investing: https://www.investing.com/members/contributors/279781574