>4 of the 5 compromised keys were under the control of one organization, And it appears the final key was also under the control of the same organization tempo

>4 of the 5 compromised keys were under the control of one organization, And it appears the final key was also under the control of the same organization temporarily. I don't have more details because I don't think they've released any, but fundamentally, that appears to be the critical vulnerability which made this hack almost inevitable. They began with a system that was extremely carefully designed to be decentralized (multiple signers) and then they centralized it. Subsequently, the hacker only had to attack one organization, instead of five Incompetence? Inside job? Or why not both?