Bitcoin Forum

accidentally came across this new lightning hardware wallet today. this is based on the validating lightning signer.
since i am a noob in the technical stuff, can anyone here say something more about the device?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdDDi9zaAAAYwJb?format=jpg&name=360x360 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdDDoKfaIAEzhF2?format=jpg&name=small
https://twitter.com/sphinx_chat/status/1571974701098074112 (https://twitter.com/sphinx_chat/status/1571974701098074112)
https://github.com/stakwork/sphinx-key (https://github.com/stakwork/sphinx-key)

"Sphinx". That must be taken from the routing schema of BOLT4: https://cypherpunks.ca/~iang/pubs/Sphinx_Oakland09.pdf  :)

Even if I haven't read a sentence yet, "running in the cloud" doesn't sound right for a Bitcoin wallet. Haven't we already accepted this? Cloud is just a bad word for this community.

As far as I understand, the game changer is this: https://twitter.com/VLSProject. Stuff such as a Lightning signer seems necessary for the long term. Air-gapped lightning funds aren't possible with the current model.

I saw this being released few days ago but I didn't understand how it works  :D
What I know is they are using ESP32 device as a hardware signer, and I recently used similar device (ttgo t-display) to create DIY LNBits bitcoin hardware wallet, so I guess they are doing something similar.
According to tweet you posted multisig lightning network is coming soon, and hardware they used can be purchased for just a few bucks  :)
Are there any instructions how to do it, other than what is posted on their github page?  

it's a bit strange that you can't find any further information about the project.
even if it seems to be in an earlier stage of development, there would be no reason not to publish some information on the website already. :P

I think that it works very similarly to LND's remote signing (https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/blob/master/docs/remote-signing.md) which has been around for quite some time now. I haven't seen any hardware wallet implementation of it, though.

I don't get the security model on any of these options, though. If the node computer is compromised, it can send malicious requests to the signer and the signer will just do what is instructed. How is this any different than having the 'signer' portion as just a local program (lightning-cli)?

The strength of hardware wallets is that an attacker doesn't have access to the keys, as your hardware wallet is unplugged and needs manual input. That's the whole point. If it's available at all times without prompt or user confirmation, there is no security gain.

If I have my hardware wallet plugged in while browsing Bitcointalk and a transaction pops up on its screen, asking me to confirm it, I won't do it ^{[and immediately start checking my PC for viruses]}, since I know it wasn't me who initiated the transaction. But the 'Lightning signers' would do exactly that (as they're designed to do exactly that; it's required functionality for a Lightning node).