In this case, employee B may not have been actively seeking employment. It's highly likely that the hacker, the "project director," approached him with the lure of a high salary. I know that in development, technology evolves rapidly, and many engineers, even if they don't want to change jobs immediately, maintain contact with headhunters and use interviews to understand their fluctuating competitiveness in the market. Furthermore, the access control settings are definitely problematic. Without the hacker and employee B, if employee A wanted to commit malicious acts, wouldn't they have simply hacked colleague C's computer and transferred billions? It seems like a single-signature rather than a multi-signature mechanism. Third, the mixing of work computers and personal computers—is this due to remote work? If everyone were working in-person, with stricter internal IT control and a clear separation between work and personal computers, these measures would likely be implemented much better. Binance's detailed explanation of the hack indicates a strong commitment to overhauling security, access controls, and processes.