While i’m not necesserily against borrow caps, i want to point that so far nothing good arrived from it.
Existance of borrow cap at COMP market for example creates nothing more than distorted market, potentially creating risks of bringing it to court for market manipulation.
After readjusting COMP distribution speed for COMP market, that created negative interest rates for borrowing side of COMP market, where users are paid to borrow COMP. However, unlike ETH and WBTC markets, existance of market CAP, creates a priveledged group of users, who borrowed before CAP was reached, and excluding everybody else who want to take advantage of that market situation later, when CAP was reached. And that could potentially be called a market manipulation.
I see market CAP doing more harm really than any good and market would rather be better without it than with it existing in place.
And if infinite mint due some sort of exploit is the only reasoning for existence of market CAP, than i’d rather see algorithm, adjusting market CAP based on hourly average, which would prevent borrowing more than certain percent of total borrowed within one hour. That would pretty much fix your potential attack concern, as for attack, transactions usually need to happen fast, as often is used in conjuction with flash loans.
But in general, i very much dislike unnesessary human controls, as if that could be somehow misused, eventually they always will.