Bitcoin Forum

Introducing RingWallet - the first wearable hardware wallet powered by a EAL6+ Tamper-Proof Chip.

RingWallet is crafted from premium ceramic - keeping your assets safe but also ensuring you have a stylish accessory for your day-to-day life. The ring is fully waterproof, making it the only hardware wallet you can wear anywhere. You can safely wash your hands or even take a swim while wearing it. Never lose sight of your wallet again.

We understand that by this point you might not want to take off your RingWallet, which is why there's no battery. It just works, every time. If you do take it off (or someone steals it) your assets remain safe - every transaction must be approved using our app and is passcode-gated.


We're not just revolutionising the form factor - we've completely redesigned the way you backup your wallet. Ace Cards use Shamir's Secret to allow you to safely recover your wallet, without ever writing down your seed phrase. Each ring comes with 4 Ace Cards, but you can order more if you want in packs of 4,8 or 12. If you lose a card, you're still safe, as each individual card does not contain enough information for recovery.

If you made it this far - we're offering you a 15% discount on the ring bringing the total price including shipping and taxes to $84 (including 4 Ace Cards). Sign up now on http://ringwallet.com/

This offer will only be available during the waitlist period.

Visit RingWallet Website! (https://b.link/fbpssan6)


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GL3VT4NWYAAhDhy?format=png&name=large

Tangem ring wallet?

Is the EAL6+ secure element chip open source?

Someone can wear it like a ring. It looks like a ring but I think it would be very dangerous for someone to wear a wallet to everywhere he is going to. I will prefer to keep my wallet secure somewhere at home for privacy reasons.

I prefer mostly the wallet that make use of QR code and camera but I think it is making use of NFC.

This is my main grip (amongst others) with "wearable" cold wallet devices - once it gets mass marketed and known to the general audience, the user will have a mark on his/her back from ill intended individuals. I easily see users of the device being victims of the famous $5 wrench attack.

Since the devices comes already wtih 4 Ace Cards, it is my understanding that the user doesn't generate a new wallet (as opposed to hardware wallets) and instead the ring comes already "configured" with the seed phase that comes within the 4 Ace Cards using Shamir's Secret correct? If so, how can the user be sure that the whole process of generating the keys was safe?

Well I just checked their site and they claim that even if your ring gets misplaced or lost, you do not need to worry as it is bind with your biometric information and no one can steal the crypto.


I don't know how this works and how secure it is but since the ring can be misplaced more often as it is with you all the time, even if you are sure that losing the ring will not lose your crypto, still buying a new ring again and again for 84$ is still expensive  ???  (assuming that ring is more likely to get misplaced more often as compared to a hardware wallet stored in a safe location).

What of physical attack? Someone to physically attack the owner of the ring wallet and tell him to send all his coins to the his (attackers) addresses.

If truly it is supporting BIP39 seed phrase, you can use any other wallet that is supporting BIP39 seed phrase for the recovery.

Nice website!   Really pushes the product over the features.   ;)

Looks like you are looking to grab irreversible currency for vapourware.  :/  Negative trust left to avoid impulse buyers.    I will remove it if you provide one of:

a) answers to any of the questions asked
b) provide corporation KYC as required by law
c) provide a list of partners, instead of a signup form

You could try an angel investor. (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5492878.msg64006428#msg64006428)

Hi! I'll answer each of your questions in turn.

Firstly, Tangem is indeed developing a wallet in the form of a ring - however, there is no clear release date, and from what we understand it will be much more expensive than RingWallet. Additionally, our unique implementation of Shamir's Secret Sharing for wallet backup is a crucial feature that only RingWallet supports.

Secondly, the chip used inside the ring is manufactured by NXP, which is the leading semiconductor manufacturer for bank card chips. Their chips are used in billions of bank cards around the world, and it is not open source. However, they have never been involved in any cases where the security of the chips have been breached, and they actively spend many millions each year making sure the chips are bulletproof.

Thirdly, there's arguments to keeping some wallets at home and others with you. Personally, I have had several hardware wallets for many years - some come with me everywhere, while others stay at home. However, RingWallet is indistinguishable from any other ceramic, non-smart ring. If the ring is stolen, your funds remain safe.

Finally, yes the chip communicates with your phone using NFC. We are aiming to onboard a lot of new people into the space as well, and the vast majority of the population is used to tapping their card to pay for things - so it makes sense for them to tap their wallet on their phone. Communication is secure and encrypted, but I understand why you might prefer a different communication method - it's all about preference, which is why more competition in the hardware space is a positive for the industry and for the user experience.

---

Just to clarify - the Ace Cards or RingWallet don't come preconfigured. This is the setup flow for the RingWallet and it's AceCards:
1. Install RingWallet App
2. Bring RingWallet next to phone for initialisation and wallet generation.
3. Choose if you wish to use Ace Cards (using Shamir's Secret Sharing) for backup, or write down your seed phrase.
4. If you choose Ace Cards, the app then prompts you to bring each card next to the phone so that it can record the appropriate data.


For more info about how Shamir's Secret Sharing works, this is a pretty simple to understand article https://medium.com/@keylesstech/a-beginners-guide-to-shamir-s-secret-sharing-e864efbf3648.

---

Hi!

Yeah, the ring itself can't be accessed without the pin used in the app/biometric info. You can think of it as similar to the passcode required to open apps on a ledger.

Since RingWallet can be worn at all times, without the need to take it off for charging or showering - it would be quite hard to lose. Consider the fact that people go a lifetime without losing their wedding bands, so I doubt you would need to be buying a new ring every few months to restore your wallet. Additionally, if you choose to write down your seed phrase rather than use AceCards, you can simply use that seed phrase to access your wallet - without buying a new RingWallet. Furthermore, you don't actually have to wear your RingWallet - you can keep it stashed away at home in a secure location if you wish to do so, and only wear it when you need to access your assets on the go.

---

Hi! Not sure what you mean by vapourware - we spent a lot of time developing unique and security centric features for RingWallet that improve the overall UX and I can assure you none of it is vapourware. If any of the features seems to be vapourware to you, let me know and I'll explain the reasoning behind building it.

Our team is doxxed. We are incorporated in Romania (Europe) and we are also establishing an entity in the US. We are not new in web3, and the core team has been building various companies in the space for many years. I am not sure what legal requirement for corporation KYC you are referring to - but if you could elaborate I am happy to provide all applicable information to you.

We will gradually reveal partnerships on our website and social media page. At the moment we have partnerships established with several L1s and L2s, as well as some infrastructure projects - but these will all be revealed in due course. The sign up form is simply a bonus for those who discover RingWallet early on, to offer them a 15% discount on the RingWallet once we start to take preorders.

I would like to wear it, this is likely to be a new way of storing assets in the ring and I'm excited to see its price range, should be affordable, although I prefer an easily accessible Decentralized software wallet and I'm using the former Bitkeep currently known as Bitget Wallet.

One of the nice security features of the Tangem ring is that fact that it will not work while on your finger. So you don't have to worry about people communicating with it while it's on your hand. Or just grabbing your phone while you sleep and and putting it to your hand, you actually have to take the ring off.

IMO having it work while on your hand is not a good idea.

-Dave

Please do.  What are your corporation details in Romania?

Does that not defeat the purpose of having a wearable hardware wallet if you have to take it off? RingWallet will also support card payments at some point in the future, making it easy to pay with it at any POS in the world - directly from your finger, and directly using self-custody crypto.

Once again IMO, it's a security thing. You have to preform the deliberate action of taking the ring off to use it. People can't say grab your phone while you are sleeping and then use a fingerprint to unlock it and do something with the ring. You could probably get my phone and finger while I sleep but there is no way you are getting a ring off without waking me up. That is obviously a worst case scenario.

Or how about you are doing a TX but since the ring is on the finger of the hand that you are using to hold the phone a TX is sent before you are 100% ready. Having to take the ring off is just a security thing.

Kind of like Tangem cards. Mine never leave their rfid shields until I am ready to do something.

Everyone has a different view. This is just mine.

-Dave

People have been robbing others of expensive jewelry for decades simply by cutting off their wrist if they hang it out the window.   :o

If you are sleeping somewhere that you worry about theft, I would say don't use this imaginary product.

Hey guys, I'm one of the founders and I can see there's quite a few questions; some of them have been left unanswered. I'll do my best to answer them all. For simplicity I will just quote insert the different comments. First off, before I get into it; I understand that the website and/or the initial post was a bit "salesy" and I apologise for that. Regarding both, they were made by the marketing team.. so yeah. It's good feedback though and I'll have a closer look at this; I was honestly mostly focused on the product and fundraising.


1. Yes, Tangem is releasing a ring as well. The main differences being theirs is more expensive (announced retail price on their blog of $200+) and they don't have a Shamir implementation like we do with Ace cards. Other than that, it should mostly be the same, though I'm just guessing here since it's not released.
2. The chip we use is NXP P71; it's a bank-level chip and has EAL6+ securit as tested by NXP. I believe none of the NXP chips are open source. I also don't think there's many, if any open-source chips at all right now. Satoshi Labs recently funded a company working on an open-source chip for hardware wallets but I haven't seen anything clear on it for a while now. If they do release and it supports our needs we'd be more than happy to switch over. We're also exploring other chip alternatives but for now we stuck with NXP.
3. That's a fair point, I'll address a few of those, however:

• The ring has absolutely no markings on the outside, just a very simple logo on the inside of the ring
• You have to understand, the purpose of this product is not necessarily for you to store 100BTC on it. The purpose is much simpler in nature; a) we want people to be able to have some crypto with them and use it easily in case they want to; i.e. small amounts and b) we want to onboard existing users who don't use a hardware wallet due to their complexity. There's around ±500M crypto users worldwide and yet lifetime wallet sales are less than 20M units across all wallet companies combined; less than 4%. Which is crazy, but it makes sense, because the process is too complicated for casual users. 
• Stealing the ring alone does nothing. There's 2 viable ways to steal the money: a) someone steals the ring, the phone it was paired with, the phone password as well as the app password and b) someone steals either your seed-phrase or your ace cards depending on how you set it up initially.
• There's actually quite a lot of security into it even when you compare it to a traditional hardware wallet for 3 main reasons: a) the chip actually has a self-destruct in case something malicious actually ends up being transmitted to it, in addition to its base security (feel free to check this out on NXP website yourself as this isn't as a result of our work but their work since this is a bank-grade chip) b) there's fewer attack vectors; no battery, no ports, no internet, no bluetooth etc. There's only one mode of communication; NFC. and c) if you set up your ace-cards, since they use Shamir, they are realistically safer than a simple seed phrase

1. IF the product does become as popular as in this theoretical example, a wannabe wrench attacker would probably know the ring is useless even if he gets it. Furthermore, it's not much different than somebody knowing you have crypto because of your instagram posts or etc and then attacking you with a wrench, so I get your point, but there's a lot of what ifs involved.
2. Nothing comes pre-configured. The user gets a choice; write down a seed phrase or use Ace Cards, which in essence means using Shamir's Secret Sharing we generate multiple sets of seeds based on how many cards you want to set up (with the default being 4, and 2/4 for restoring the wallet) and then you simply store the multiple seed on these cards instead of writing them down. We will be using the Trezor implementation of Shamir for this since it's the current industry standard. The only difference being, Trezor asks you to write it down on a piece of paper and we store it on the cards. Lastly, you have to understand that the mechanism is specifically built to help onboard either existing crypto users who mostly use software wallets into using something hardware and/or new crypto users; which is why we've built it to be as easy to setup and use as possible.


1. Yes, I've explained above the two possible ways of stealing the actual contents.
2. I understand your point on price but you have to understand we are still an early stage startup. First off, that price includes both shipping and VAT, second of all as more time passes and we ramp up production to a larger scale my wish is for us to eventually be able to reduce the cost, but currently, that is the best we can do. Lastly, Tangem has an announced retail price of $200+ so we honestly already did our best in reducing the cost as much as possible, especially since every order also comes with 4 Ace Cards included. Hopefully though, people won't lose their ring that often. At the end of the day, everyone wears engagement rings and wedding bands all day and no one loses them on a monthly basis.


1. Sure, you can get attacked on the street but again: a) this is a far-fetched theoretical and b) you can get attacked for dozens of reasons, including much more mundane things that require much less effort. For your example to be a success, you would have to be physically coerced for a minimum of several minutes if not a quarter of an hour. Someone threatens you, you have to pull up your phone, put in the phone password, then the app password, then you have to actually *send* the money to the attacker. I mean this is not a walk in the park and quite unlikely to happen. Lastly, again, our main wish is for this to be an on-the-go wallet (1) and mostly serve the large population of crypto users who only use software wallets (2), in which case they would be safer either way
2. That is correct, if you set it up with a seed phrase you can naturally restore it on any other wallet.


Hey Vod, that feels a bit personal, but I'll answer your questions.
1. You can't even buy anything on the website right now, so not sure I see how we can grab *any* currency at all. Second, it's a bit disingenuous to call this vapourware, or at least it feels like it for someone that spent the last year working on it. Anyway, moving on.
2. I will provide you answer to the questions we asked but just so we're clear a) you could've found the company by just googling the name and b) again, it feels a bit personal for you to threaten to remove the post if we don't provide KYC.

Whatever, the company is Ringwallet SRL, registered in Bucharest, Romania (https://www.romanian-companies.eu/ringwallet-srl-49560507/). I'm also more than happy to actually do KYC, but I'm more curious about how you'll be storing my ID/Passport in case I do the KYC with you? We're also incorporating a US entity, I'll share the info of that as well when it's finished.

3. We don't have a list of public partners yet; we made the project public for the first time less than a month ago. I also don't understand how that subtracts from the work we've done on this? Just fyi, I'm actually happy for you to even visit our phyisical office in Bucharest. Or whoever you want to send in your place. Any time Monday - Friday 9am-9pm. I can share the office address in dm; I genuinely don't want to post that on a public forum because then everyone can just show up doing all sorts of crazy things.
4. I am already working on doing both some fundraising and getting a more official list of partners to build legitimacy, I'm just a bit disheartened because at the end of the day, bitcointalk was and still is a forum where all sorts of crazy ideas were tried and the reason why I specifically wanted this posted here. Sure, I'll admit the post was way too "salesy" and I apologise for that; we're honestly a relatively small team and I don't have time to individually check every post the team makes. Still, it's a legit project, and we're not even asking for anything. You cannot buy anything, you cannot invest or anything like that. We mostly just wanted feedback and to hear people's thoughts.


Yeah. Hopefully, this is just the first of multiple wearables to come; in different shapes and forms. For now the base MSRP is going to be 99$ with VAT and shipping included, and for the pre-orders (which are not open) it will be 84$. In terms of software wallets the one I like the most is Rabby.


I haven't seen more about this to be honest, I'll do some more research and find out what you mean exactly but I find it a bit hard to understand how the ring can "know" if it's on your hand? Unless there's a specific lock you can turn on from within the app. I don't think it's a good feature for it not to work while on your hand though; it kind of defeats the purpose? Just to be clear, neither of what you said can happen.
a) for the ring to communicate in any meaningful way, the counterpart has to pass authentication; these chips are bank-grade so that means whenever you want to interact with it you have to pass a cryptogram to it, for eg a VISA POS would be able to pass the cryptogram and communicate with it, your paired phone would as well, but some random third party would just get locked behind the cryptogram. Now let's assume this is a bad actor with good technical knowledge and it somehow tries to fool the program by either bruteforcing or injecting x thing into it => the chip gets burned.
b) for someone to grab your phone while you sleep, they also have to take your ring, know your phone password and your app password. Now, considering they do this while you sleep and know all of the above, they have to be someone close, i.e. wife, kids, family etc. If you're on a plane, I doubt anyone would know your passwords, and that's not even discussing the fact that probably no one would let that fly, starting with the flight attendants.
c) it's not enough to just I don't know, put somebody's phone next to your ring; it's like a normal hardware wallet, you have to confirm the transaction inside the app. And sure the way you do that is by putting the ring next to *your* phone, but that's after all the passwords.

Lastly, even IF the ring doesn't work while on your finger, like Tangem; how does that prevent someone from doing the things you've mentioned if they can grab your phone and know your passwords?


Shared above. Again, happy for you or somebody else to come visit our actual physical office. Also, again, happy to actually do a real KYC with you, but I genuinely want to know how you'll be storing my actual ID/Passport and if you'll be KYCing in return or will you be asking me to share my ID with you while you remain anon; because that doesn't sound fair. Happy to do it either way just so we can end this discussion about vapourware but I genuinely don't want my ID to end up on some online marketplace so I want to have some safety in that sense if I have to share it with you.


I can understand your point of view. For now the ring is not built to work like that; it works on the finger. But you bring an interesting conundrum and I think that we can add this as an optional for people to decide whether they want to left their rings unlocked or lock them. I still don't understand how the tangem ring would *know* it's not on your finger unless you have an actual information being transmitted, i.e. locking the ring, but we can probably implement a locking mechanism that you can activate from within the app. I'm not 100% sure if we will be able to include this in the absolute first release but I'll have a deeper look at it.


Again, I really don't get it. Why are you so against this and calling it imaginary? I'm happy to do a video call with you, invite you to the office, meet the rest of the team, or even personally do KYC with you, I also shared the company details (even though it was 1 word on google away) so can you please just stop with this rhetoric?

As for people getting their wrist cut off, I genuinely don't know where you live, but this is something that probably only happens in some of the worst regions in some of the worst countries on earth. That's not a casual thing like wtf.

The OP said you have already been doxxed.  Why are you concerned about what I know?  Are you the same person as the OP?  He lied to me and said he would assure my fears.  :/

When you incorporate as a US entity and provide the documentation, I will remove the Trustpilot report and the negative trust.   You must understand that all you have right now are words.  I have been here long enough to see people convince naive others to do almost anything.

Where did I say I'm concerned about what you know? I just said if you want me to provide you with my actual ID to prove I am who I say then obviously I'd want to know my ID won't end up on some marketplace. That's all.

Yes, the entire team is doxxed if that's what you're asking. I am not the same person as OP, Christian is a team member and the one taking care of marketing. I'm also a team member and the one who initially came up with the product.  How did he lie to you? I read through all the messages in this thread and don't see how or where he lied to you?

I've already shared what exists, which is the Romanian entity for Europe. When the US entity is finished I will also share that here, no problem. When you say "provide the documentation" what do you mean specifically just so we can avoid any other contradictory discussions.

Lastly, I understand and respect your right to be careful about newly posted things, my only requests were not to make unfounded accusations and claims. I didn't even know you made a trustpilot review before but just to be clear, I'm quoting it here: "This is vapourware. The developer has lied in his announcement thread on bitcointalk. Topic 5495902.0"

Again, what is the lie? Because this is simply disingenous. I replied to all of the things you requested above and you just went on demanding new things, which again, I'm fine with and I'll publish the details of the US entity as well when it's finished but 1. It's probably 1 or 2 weeks away and 2. How is it any different from the Romanian comapny? The US entity is specifically made for the US market like the Romanian entity is made for the European market.  

Again, I've provided all you asked and was willing to provide even more than what you asked; i.e. come to our office, do a video call etc and you just accuse us of lying about what exactly, calling it vapourware and leaving unsubsustantied reviews.

---

Just to quote your answer as well. I've responded to all of these, and instead you just decided to leave a trustpilot review accusing us of lying and asking more info about the US entity, which I'm happy to provide when finished, but you know for a fact that it's not finished because I had already mentioned in my initial comment that the US entity is not yet out.

I just don't get you. I understand skepticism, but this is just ill will at this point.


Lastly, you say "I have been here long enough to see people convince naive others to do almost anything." But what are you even accusing us of? Again, there is literally nothing you can buy on the website or anything else at this point. So what would we be convincing people of? Giving feedback? Seriously man.

I genuinely look forward to your apology after we also send you the details of the US entity, because you know nothing about us or the project, there is literally 0 ask and nothing for sale at all, and yet you choose to call it vapourware and leave ragebait reviews to "defend" naive people in regards to what exactly?

I'm sorry, but it's up to you to provide proof, not me.  I am not the one making promises. 

When I left that "ragebit review", I checked the box to notify you.  You had no prior history.

Do you think I am a teenager looking to prove myself?  I do not make accusations blindly - you are the one offering nothing but words.

Post your US corporation documents and I will remove the trust.  Or, you can attempt to discredit my intentions.  I warn you though, I've already been through much worse than you can dish out, unless you are protected by the forum administrator.

I will provide the US entity details as soon as they are out. But I do expect an apology afterwards.

We have no prior history on Trustpilot because, we've only started publishing anything about ringwallet for less than a month.

I'm just upset because you keep saying things like "you lied" or "you make promises" etc; when we haven't lied about anything, we haven't made promises and there is nothing for people to buy/spend money on. The absolute best they can do is sign up for a waitlist with an email. That's literally it.

We just wanted some feedback. And it's a bit disheartening to get constantly accused for it. That's all.

Later edit: Again, I understand skepticisim, but try to put yourself in my shoes as well. We've done 12-hour days 6-days a week for the better part of a year now trying to build something that we personally find cool and useful for people so it's not exactly the greatest feeling to be accused like that for what, asking people to sign up for a waitlist with an email and giving us feedback? I understand your point and I will provide the US entity details as soon as they are out, I also understand you've probably seen a lot of scams; I'm just asking you to try to think of it the other way as well: assume you're wrong and we're just a group of people who spent a good amount of time building something and wanted to get some feedback and initial opinions, how do you think it feels? Anyway, that's all I have to say.

I will continue to answer questions in the thread and provide any information that is requested. Will update after US entity is out.

Based on other smart rings that have been made from premium ceramics, they only provide protection up to a certain degree... RingWallet's website mentions having a "water-resistant build" without an official rating!

@Ringwallet
Does it work well with tough/thick rugged phone cases?
^{- Another hardware wallet provider with a similar product to yours has issues with such things.}

The ring is rated as IP68 so that means you can wash your hands with it or go swim in the pool in fresh water but you shouldn't use it for dives or anything related to the sea. It also gives it dust resistance because of how it is enclosed.

It depends on multiple things to be honest, the most important of which being the specific phone type you are using and how thick the case actually is. If it's a normal case on a normal phone, then it should work well, but if the phone doesn't have a great NFC reader, is maybe a bit old as well and you also have a very thick case on it then yes you might have some problems getting the phone reader to see it; this is somewhat normal and expected behaviour to be honest, however the worst that can happen is you just have to move it around and hold it there for a bit longer so the reader can recognise it so it shouldn't be the end of the world.

I feel I was lied to.  The OP said he was going to assure me, and when I asked for it, he ignored me.  I have an issue with people who do that.

Do you think it's harder to scam someone once they are on a mailing list?  Why do you keep using that as a defense?


That would be the mature thing to do.

What do you mean he said he was going to assure you and then ignored you? I literally answered everything you asked and provided you the company details as you requested; how were you ignored? Is it because I answered instead of Christian; how does that even matter? I specifically offered, to provide anything necessary to prove we're legit, including inviting you or somebody you send to our physical office, do a video call etc.

You asked for answers to the questions in the thread (all sent)
You asked for company details (already sent; if you're going to mention US entity, again, it's the exact same thing and as mentioned in my first post, before you even asked, it's not yet out, when it is I'll share those too)
And finally you said we should provide partners instead of a waitlist, but we launched less than 30 days ago so naturally we don't have some big name partners to publish yet, even though we are having discussions with some companies who could be a good fit.


In regards to "why I keep using the mailing list a a defense"

First of all, you accused us of potentially scamming people of their money, and I specifically mentioned there is literally no way for anyone to send us any kind of money. So this was in response to that.

Second of all, you are free to sign up to the mailing list with a temp mail. It's a newsletter man. What did you think it is? Because you're asking me if it's harder to scam someone after they're on the mailing list but I genuinely don't get it. We came here to get feedback and the best a user could do right now to interact with the company is just sign up for the newsletter / waitlist; we've currently only sent a welcome email and that's it.

My only problem with this entire rhetoric is twofold:
1. You accuse of potentially scamming people but there's literally no way for anyone to pay us in any form.
2. You keep changing the goalposts.

You said answer the questions -> they were answered. Then you said provide me company details -> we did. Then you said now provide me US details (when I specifically mentioned it's not out yet). Then you said we are trying to steal money -> there's no way for people to send any money. Now you're saying it's easier to scam people with the waitlist/newsletter; but what would we be even scamming them with? Also, again, you can just sign up to it with a free temp-mail online, in case we actually do send anything that can be considered a scam you can screenshot it and prove this, no? I literally have no problem with skepticism, I'm just upset because you keep accusing of things even though we repeatedly tried to offer you the different things you asked for.

You then said we lied; and even said so in the trustpilot review. When I asked you how we lied, you now said you "feel" you were lied to because the OP said he would assure you and then ignored you, but that's objectively not true, I've been answering your questions non-stop. What, is it just because I'm answering the questions instead of Christian? Because that makes no sense.

So look, just listen to me for a second. We're open to criticism and feedback, that's what we came here for in the first place. I genuinely wish to get true customer insight and understand what we can do better. I'm open to providing details, information or whatever else is necessary to prove we're just trying to build something. Sure, we're not some big corporation, but I don't think that's a crime; what, is building startups exclusive to rich people? I don't think so.

Literally all that I'm asking you is to just stop throwing accusations. If you want to know something, just tell me what, and I will do my best to answer. But I don't see the point of continuing to insinuate we're scammers at every point when I've genuinely done my best to answer all your concerns to date.


Edit: I'll resume my point.

First, I don't think you were lied to, and if you feel that way please explain to me why so I can do something about it.
Second, I will provide the US entity details as soon as they are out. Until then, at least try to assume we're just normal people, because we're not going to be selling anything before then either way. I can assure you of that.
Third, if you feel that there's other information I can provide you in the meantime to prove we're genuinely just trying to build something, then please let me know, and I'll do my best to provide it.

My trust will not make or break this revolutionary product.  It will be removed when you can prove it exists.  :)

Edit:  Sent you a PM.

I read it, but I will reply in a few minutes because need to buy a copper membership to be able to reply. I already paid for it just waiting for it to process and will answer.

Why do you have to pay a fee if you are replying to my PM?   :(

I hope you can verify yourself or your product quickly.   You will learn the reason I am the longest running member on default trust is that I am honest.   If I write something that I later find out is not true, I do not write it again - to do so could open myself to civil liability and with bitcoin prices as high as they are now, the punitive damages could be in the hundreds of millions.  

In your case I will also give you a glowing review on Trustpilot for fighting my paranoia.  :)    But, much like the Israelis' using a $10,000,000 missile to shoot down a $10,000 drone, I wasted a lot of time on this.   I hope it can be resolved with more than claims.

Edit:  After some brief PMs I will be waiting to see proof of the product.

Bitcointalk only allows you to send 2 DMs a day as a newbie and I had already answered to someone previously, so yeah. That's on the forum, not me. I don't really know why it works like that, probably to make you buy the membership I guess? Anyway, I bought a copper membership and replied to your messages.

Edit: that's fine, I understand and will continue to provide anything necessary. who knows, maybe in a few months from now you'll become a supporter after all of our messages so I'm okay with it.

It's just antenna placement and shielding for the NFC. If you get it *just* right you can get it to scan while on your finger. But there is no way you can do it easily. Not so much tech as design.

-Dave

Anyone who would be buying the "ring wallet" will be buying with the intention that it is a hardware wallet. So if the wallet can be accessed with only seed phrases too, without the need of the ring wallet then why spend so much money on the hardware? One can use the desktop wallet like Electrum and it is free too  ???

Let's suppose someone get hold of the seed phrases, so it does not matter we are having the ring wallet (the hardware device) with us, the hacker can import that seed phrase in any software wallet and get our funds. This just denies the purpose of the ring wallet, except for those who want to try new technologies. Don't you think it is a big security concern that the funds in the wallet can be access without the hardware device too ?

Ok, that makes more sense. I'm not sure that's very good design though if you plan on using it daily / multiple times a day if you always have to take it off. I had figured it's more of a "lock your ring" type of thing which would've made a bit more sense in my opinion.

---

Hey, so let me answer this in two parts since it might be easier:

1. The case you are describing can only happen if when creating your wallet you choose to back it up with a seed phrase. This, however, is literally how a seed phrase works, it's the same case for your trezor, ledger or any other seed phrase based wallet out there. Also, the seed phrase is a physically written set of words, I don't really understand how a hacker would get a hold of this unless the "hacker" is your family/friends who got into your house, knew where your seed phrase was and then stole it?
2. But most importantly, when you setup your ringwallet initially, you get a choice about how you want to setup your wallet. Sure, you can choose the seed phrase as above, but you have the option to setup your wallet backed by Ace Cards in which case everything you've described cannot happen, because if you back it up with the Ace cards you would indeed have to restore it only through the app on another ring. Perhaps in the future we may try to add the ability of restoring Ace Cards into other places as well, but for now if your ring is set up with this backup method you can only restore it on a new ring through the app, so in this case the hacker or thief or whatever would have to find and steal multiple ace cards to even have a chance of restoring your wallet.

I'm intrigued. Having worked in the specialty ceramics industry for decades I have to ask: Is the ring silicon nitride? With the black color and high gloss edges it looks like it.

Perhaps 2 versions?
1 with an better antenna for the people who leave their tap to pay credit cards in their pocket.
And a version for people like me who have their tap to pay credit card in a RF blocking sleeve in an RF blocking wallet in a RF blocking pocket.

-Dave

Hey, yeah, that was a really good catch. The non-oxides component does contain silicon nitride, but I don't think it's only composed of that, even besides the oxides part of it, I believe it's a mix of multiple oxides and non-oxides.

---

It's definitely good feedback and honestly not something we had considered a lot. For now I believe a good intermeidary solution would be offering an option where you can manually lock the ring from the app for a period of time. I will consider perhaps having 2 version, but realistically, from an operational & stock perspective I'm not sure that is viable for a first version.

Hey there RingWallet.
I heard about you on twitter few days ago, but you guys are not the first project working on Ring shape hardware wallets.
Last time I checked there are blank NFC rings that can be purchased  cheap from China, and they are not that expensive.
One thing I am looking with hardware wallets is they need to be with Open Source code, and I don't think Ring wallet is going to be open source.
Compatibility with third party wallets is also very important, I don't want to get stuck with only one working app, especially if closed sourced.
I wanted to ask about Shamir backup, can this be used to recover with other hardware wallets that support Shamir like Trezor, Keystone, etc?

PS
Vod you might want to take it easy with your extreme paranoia on members who just registered in forum, they didn't ask for your money.
I am always suspicious with any new projects but you have gone way to far this time.  :P

You reading my PMs now?  :P

Hey, thanks for the message and sorry for the delay, I had been working on a few things these past few days.

So regarding blank NFC rings, yeah of course I know what you mean, but the rings you're looking at most usually come with what are called NFC Tags (https://www.nxp.com/products/wireless-connectivity/nfc-hf/ntag-for-tags-and-labels:NTAG-TAGS-AND-LABELS) which is essentially NFC chips, but very low-power / low storage type of Chips (think up to 16kB total storage maximum). We use NXP P71D321 (https://www.nxp.com/products/security-and-authentication/security-controllers/smartmx3-p71d321-secure-and-flexible-microcontroller:SMARTMX3-P71D321) which is a microcontroller with a lot of security elements and NFC functionality. It is the same chip used in bank cards, and it runs JCOP on it; JCOP is an operating system for security sensitive systems and runs on smartcards. Furthermore to put it in a ring you have to get the FPC version of it etc; anyway what I'm trying to say is the options you see on Alibaba aren't really similar to this, to give a more good comparison, the Ace Cards (where you store Shamir) have MIFARE chips, or basically one of the best chips you can get on one of these rings from Alibaba; but we only use the cards to store a seed, so those are basically just toys used to store small amount of information and/or do simple access control (like a hotel key access card).

P71 is also one of the best options out there in terms of security and performance (that small chip has up to 344kB of Flash and 12kB of RAM which I know sounds little but it's actually a lot for a chip of this type). It was also necessary for what we're doing because JCOP alone would have occupied more than the largest NTAG offers in storage (16kB), and that's not even taking security into consideration. Just to give a simple example, if someone were to try to send unauthorized instructions to the chip repeatedly, the chip automatically bricks to protect itself etc.

Anyway, let me answer the open-source questions and everything else. First of all, I want to make clear that the code will be open-source. It is not yet open-source and I'm willing to take that criticism so let me explain why. The reason is simple, I want to publish it with a similar license to Uniswap V3; i.e. if you want to use the code for commercial purpose you will have to wait 2-3 years from every release. And free to use for anything personal. So because of that I am in discussions with lawyers to well, basically, make a license for us. In the best case scenario, the code will be made open-source before we ship the first rings, in a worst worst type of scenario it will be open source within 12 months of right now (taking into account that first rings will be shipped sometime in 4 months from now give or take).

Now to answer the other questions. The Shamir implementation we will be using is SLIP-0039, which is industry-standard, open-source and developed by Satoshi Labs (mother company of Trezor) - https://github.com/satoshilabs/slips/blob/master/slip-0039.md

The difference, here, being, the seeds themselves are actually stored on the Ace Cards as opposed to on a piece of paper, so to the question "will you be able to recover it on Trezor etc" that mostly depends on if they will accept restoring from an NFC card, maybe not on day one, but eventually I think they will. The other question is if they are compatible with SLIP-0039; Trezor I know for a fact is, the others I don't know.

I hope that answers the question but I'm happy to clarify if anything is unclear

You are doing something similar like coldcard wallet, and that is NOT Open Source.
Don't make your own restricted code and put open source sticker on it, because you are deceiving customers like this.
It's even worse that you only planning to do that sometime in future, and I really don't understand why some hardware wallet manufacturers are scared of forking and potential contribution to their code.

Again, this is NOT open source, so don't try to deceive people claiming it is.
Best case this can be source viewable license like common clause or something similar.

So short answer is No, I can't restore it currently with any other wallets in the market.
Thank you.

1.First of all, again, the only restriction is literally taking the code and using it as-is to launch a for-profit company the next day. Furthermore, it will be time-limited, so something like 2 years from each release. Literally the same as Uniswap v3 did. And to answer the question of why, sure.

I want the code to be public so people can check it themselves and people don't have to trust in us directly.
At the same time, I genuinely don't want someone to just copy-paste the entire codebase on the 2nd day after launch and then do their own. Me and the team have spent more than a year working on this just to date and we haven't even launched, yeah I want some protection from competitors. I don't find anything wrong with that. You want to copy it for-profit? Sure, you can do that too, 2 years after the release. And I genuinely find nothing wrong with that, because besides direct for-profit uses everything else will be permitted and even for-profit use will be permitted after 2 years so where's the issue with that?


2. It will be very similar to Uniswap v3 licensing https://support.uniswap.org/hc/en-us/articles/14569783029645-Uniswap-v3-Licensing / https://github.com/Uniswap/v3-core/blob/main/LICENSE

Is uni v3 not open source just because all the people copying their code for-profit had to wait until April 1st 2023 ? I don't think so, because everyone still copied it in the end, but that gave them time to work on a v4.

I do understand what you are saying in regards to common clause vs open-source and that seems fair. I will consider this further because we haven't taken a final decision in that regards but I am currently tending more towards something like common clause vs open source.

3. If Trezor supports NFC you should be able to restore it on a Trezor. You also have the option of using a seed phrase as opposed to Shamir which means you can restore it anywhere and you will also have the option to save Shamir directly as words if you don't want to use Ace Cards so for anyone who supports SLIP-0039 if you used words on paper you can restore it wherever you want.

Edit: I read some more as well and it seems you are correct, adding a restriction for commercial use cases makes the code not respect open-source rules anymore. I was genuinely not aware of this beforehand. I will give this some more thought and see if we want to go the source available vs fully open source route. My fear is exactly the one described above; i.e. someone forking it the next day and launching a competitor.

Would be honestly really great to hear some opinions of why you think open source is better vs source available.

IMO you will get a lot of resistance to reproducible source available vs open source. And I think you should do what works for your company.
I don't care so long as I can verify that it's good and even more with a product like this I don't think it matters.

There are 2 parts of the product the ring and the software. The issue is the physical ring can be anything even a cheap EMV card. So that means someone can come in and take your work and make a cheap ass product using your code.

For things where the software is the product (electrum) then I want open source. For products where someone can take your code and create a similar product for a low price and sell it for a lot then reproducible source available is fine for me.

I will also say that this is probably not going to be a popular opinion here, but it is mine :-)

-Dave

I really don't care what Uniswap is doing, especially when knowing who is behind them, how they are getting funded, and how they are doing their business.
Hardware wallet manufacturer should never be compared with uniswap exchange.

It is wrong when you are claiming to have open source code sometimes in future, but in reality this will never happen.
Be honest to yourself, to everyone else, and don't ever mention words ''open source'' in connection with RingWallet.

No problem, you can release it with any code you want, just learn what FOSS and open source really is.
Just imagine if Satoshi was scared that someone will copy and fork his project called Bitcoin...  :P

List of Hardware wallets with Open Source firmware who are NOT scared of someone forking their code:

• Trezor One; model T; Safe 3 (https://github.com/trezor)
• Bitbox (https://github.com/digitalbitbox)
• Passport (https://github.com/Foundation-Devices)
• Jade (https://github.com/Blockstream/Jade)
• Satochip (https://github.com/Toporin)
• Keepkey (https://github.com/keepkey)
• BitHD* (https://github.com/bithd)
• Prokey (https://github.com/prokey-io)
• OneKey Classic; Mini, Touch (https://github.com/OneKeyHQ)
• HyperMate (https://github.com/hyperpayorg/hardwallet)
• Cypherock X1 (https://www.cypherock.com/)
• Hito (pre-sale) (https://hito.xyz/)
• Bitlox (https://github.com/bitlox)
• Keystone3 (https://github.com/KeystoneHQ)
• BitKey (https://github.com/proto-at-block/bitkey)
• Portal (https://github.com/TwentyTwoHW)
• SeedSigner DIY Wallet (https://github.com/SeedSigner)
• Krux DIY Wallet (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5350905.0)

Thank you for this list; I'm going to add it to my site.

Thanks for the answer. I'll answer in parts.

Re Uniswap; I used it as an example so you could understand what I meant. I also don't know who they're supported by and whatnot to be honest.
Re Open source:
1. I genuinely didn't know the difference between open-source and source-available at the time. That's my mistake and I apologise for it.
2. As mentioned in my previous message, you, as well as some other people we are talking to privately have expressed opinions in regards to why go open source vs source-available so we haven't made a final decision as of right now. At the very minimum, the code will be made source-available and we are still debating whether it will be under a trully open source license or a commons clause one. I will update here after we make a final decision.

Re Satoshi & Bitcoin; I don't have such delusions of grandeur. I think ringwallet is a cool nifty product but it will never be even 0.1% of bitcoin, so not sure it's a fair comparison. With that said, I do understand where you're coming from, and just to be clear, the difference between the license we initially planed to use and a commons license is that ours was/is time-limited; meaning anyone would've been able to use the code for whatever commercial purposes they wanted to after a period of 2 years, as opposed to commons clause, which as far as I understand, is permanent.

So back to your theoretical example, if Satoshi published bitcoin under a 2-year limited license, people would've just forked bitcoin 2 years later, so not really the end of the world to be honest. Because again, we didn't want to gatekeep the code forever but rather just have a 2-year headstart. Anyway. I am genuinely considering just publishing it completely as open-source when the time of launch comes, but the launch is still a few months away and until then we are still wrapping up what is left and will be making a final decision in regards to this as well.

Lastly, regarding your list; that's an awesome list and thanks for sharing. I actually went through the list myself, and since you seem to care a lot about open-source, which I appreciate, I just want to make some mentions to you regarding the list. Just to be clear, not trying to be a dickhead, but I genuinely went through the repos, so I figured some of the things I will list below should be of interest to you.

https://github.com/proto-at-block/bitkey -> commons clause license. It's combined with MIT, but it's the same as it being source-available because it also has commons clause license.
https://github.com/Cypherock -> commons clause license. Again, combined with MIT but same as above, it's source-avaialble in reality not open-source.
https://github.com/hito-xyz -> they say open source but as you can see the github is completely empty bar from some documentation; the software you're supposed to download is completely closed-source, not even source-available. Also, apparently they've been in pre-sale mode for about 2 years now and as far as I've been able to see, not much if anything has been shipped out. There's even a thread (and apparently a telegram group) of people complaining about it. Here's the thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5487572.0
https://github.com/bithd -> literal complete copy-paste fork of trezor, not sure if it's worth including in such a list, because a lot of the people on that list have actually done real heavy work and should be praised for it. This is just ctrl+c / ctrl+v.
https://github.com/digitalbitbox -> completely empty github so not even source-available
https://github.com/bitlox -> most of it is forked from bitpay, hive and multibit. The repos which are not forked have no discernible license of any kind and have not been updated in 7-8 years at a minimum, so again, not sure it qualifies as open-source or that it deserves to be on that list.

I think that's a really cool list and just wanted to let you know about these because I figured you just didn't have the time to actually check and that's why you haven't removed them yet. Some of those guys on that list have really done an incredible amount of work and I figured they shouldn't be bundled with things like the above. Anyway, thanks for the feedback and the information, I'll give this some proper thought and we will in either case announce our decision here once it's made.

i knew that this was a great idea, where one could take their hard wallet anywhere they wanted, and it was stylish and quite compact. but what concerns me here is what happens when criminals start to get to know this product and start linking people with black rings to using this product? that would definitely be quite dangerous. and more, even though this product has a waterproof feature, it still makes me feel anxious. i know that this ringwallet is a good breakthrough innovation in terms of hard wallets, but it just doesn't suit users like me.

You obviously don't know anything about licenses like you confirmed publicly, so I would be genuinely concerned purchasing any product from you.
And now all of the sudden you know how to correctly read licenses for list of wallets I posted before...

Note that most of the Common Clause licenses you mentioned don't allow selling of code, but it can still be forked and reproduced, much different than what you plan to do.
Hito is only pre-sale so it can't have code released, and Bitbox changed their github page, I can't follow all the changes and some links might be outdated, but I will update soon.
I don't know why you hate and fear forked code...it's open source, learn more about it.

cypherockx1:
https://walletscrutiny.com/hardware/cypherockx1/

bitbox02 is clearly open source:
https://walletscrutiny.com/hardware/bitBox2/
https://github.com/BitBoxSwiss

One reason to avoid open source is to make claims the open code cannot complete.  Closed source is "magic" and you can promise anything.

I would really buy one as a souvenir :P

It's a business and their ACE is the code. ColdCard put too much work to create the code that they have right now (they also copied others to be completely honest) and then The Passport wallet was creating using the ColdCard's open-source code. It's a commercial business, so it doesn't surprise me why they are scared.

The society is not ready to flex with Bitcoin wallets. It depends on the country and neighborhood but overall, you are right, it's dangerous to wear this ring and walk outside if many people discover the existence of this ring, as it should be since the company wants to sell as many as possible.

That's how people get fooled.

I have a bunch of souvenir-devices collecting dust in old boxes...
Open source alternative ring hardware wallet is around the corner so stay tuned ;)

I can argue that Passport made a much better hardware wallet and their code was totally rewritten in different language.
But I have nothing against people who still prefer coldcard that comes as a package deal with ego-maniac NKV, and list obsolete junk unusable unsafe coldcard devices is getting bigger every day... just sayin.

Agreed!  I am not against open source.   The OP could release a proprietary product with private code, and offer some really cool features to go with it.   But that requires trust that needs to be built up over time.


I called this product vapourware for this exact reason.   Product is still in design phase and they/you are looking for development funding.  


P.S!!

1. I did some more reading on licenses after our discussion.
2. You gave them as examples, and you seemed to care a lot about open-source so I was curious to see what these guys were doing. When I noticed some of them aren't really that, I figured you'd like to know, genuinely have no idea why you're trying to misconstrue what I said.
3. Common clause license isn't different to what I was saying at all, I even used the specific term in one of my posts. You can go and read my previous posts; I specifically people would be able to see/copy the code for whatever non-commercial purpose they want, the only restriction was not using it commercially for a period of 2 years. Whereas common clause restricts you from using it commercially in a perpetual manner. So not sure why you're against it when I said it but for it when you say it. (By definiton, common clause license is a source-available license and not an open-source license).

Hito has been in presale for 2 years so being open-source is just a claim at this point. But regardless, I'm not even sure why you got so upset about me checking the list. I was genuinely trying to help and you somehow took it as a personal attack.

Hey Vod, the US company should be out next week and I will share it.

As for the other things you mentioned; it's not in design phase, we're currently in production phase. As for funding; yes we are looking to raise VC funds but I don't see anything wrong with that. First of all, with the exception of Trezor most hardware wallet go and raise funding rounds because to be able to run a hardware business you need to be able to manufacture large amounts or price becomes very prohibitive on a per item cost; and making even 20,000 devices is more than $1M so that's the main reason. Beyond that we want to be able to get some proper licenses since the end goal is to allow people to use the ring at a POS which is dependent on that. Second of all, we're not raising money from random people on the internet but from professional investment funds that do due diligence so again I don't really see anything wrong with that.

Anyway, I will share the US company details when it's done.

Do I have your permission to post our PMs?   You wrote different things there than you are here.

Is this what you're referring to?


That still stands. We're not opening any sort of contribution/sale/etc. We're raising VC funds, as I stated in our dms as well.

If you're refering to the fact that I said we're in production phase, it's the same as in our dms, when I said that we're already waiting on a batch that we can send over to people for review.

Or maybe you're refering to this?


But it's the same thing as above. We're raising from VCs as I said in our dms as well. We're not launching a sale.

If you're referring to the comment about giving some legitimacy to the project; both are true. I'm sure having some VCs who back us and did due diligence will probably put some worries at rest.

Do I have permission to post our PMs?

I doxxed myself to you and while I will dox publicly as well, would prefer to do that personally.

If you want to post any of the dms without the doxxing info feel free to. But I already quoted the dms that related to the above discussion myself.

Also why do you ignore my question?

edit: or the doxxing of other people I mentioned. I want to be able to do that myself when we announce various things, not through you posting our dms.

Here, I'll make it easier for you by posting all dms without doxxing info.

First dm:



Second dm:



Third dm:



Extra dms I sent, no answer




So there you go, I literally copy-pasted our entire PMs without actual doxxing links and/or details/names of projects that can dox.

It's the same as I said above. We're raising a round from VCs. I considered running a kickstarter but decided it's a bad idea for the above reasons.

Lastly, just so we're clear
1. I will dox myself along with the entire team but much rather prefer that I do it myself, at most it will be a maximum of 2 weeks before I do. I know in the dms it says it should've been done by now. It's not because we had more things to do besides this. We will doxx soon either way.
2. The US entity should be out by the end of the coming week and I will share it.

With that said, I genuinely don't understand why you're so against us. Even when I try to answer to your questions you either ignore me or find some new way to attack me.

Thank you for the permission; I promise to only use what's necessary to correct any "inconsistencies".    Such as paying "15%" because you can't do a Kickstarter.  

Even with implied permission to post PMs, I always remove personal info.   I won't make you a PII victim.  :)   Nothing in your PMs contained any PII, so your noble proclamation to protect is a waste of breath.

In fact, you have no personal info anywhere.   The [edited doxing info] you wrote covers ambiguous information anyway.  Nothing you sent me identified you as a person, it was just lists of things you did in the past.  As a seasoned scam buster, how can I trust any of those past events identified you as a person?    Plus, you claim you were doxxed in your home country, but provide no information more on that.


Which question?  I see two "?" in your post.  Literally, both responses would be "no" - my concern is in the inconsistencies of your post history as a whole.  I cannot say one specific part had the only lie.

The hypocrisy of you asking why I ignored your question in the same post you ignored my question.  Instead of answering my question, you implied I was doxxing you?  

I removed three things from the PMs, one: the link to my linkedin, two: the list of what I did before which is also on my linkedin and three: the name of a project I built. I won't talk about the others but I'm pretty sure the linkedin link which has my name counts as personal info. What do you mean I claim I was doxxed in my home country?

Regarding the Kickstarter, 10% is the kickstarter fee and the other 5% you are probably refering to is the fee that marketing agencies that do kickstarter campaign take, which I also mentioned in my dms.

My question was what specifically where you refering to when you said


I was asking what exactly you were referring to when you said I wrote different things in our dms than I did here, so I assumed you were talking about my comments regarding VC funding since that was what we were talking about and what you quoted. So I quoted those messages and asked. You said the answer is no so then what is the inconsistency?


1. I directly quoted from our dms the parts that were related to what we were discussing, which was VC funds.
2. I didn't imply you were doxxing me, you said you want to post our dms and I said sure as long as you remove the doxxing info. And then I just posted our entire dm convo without the doxxing info.

Edit: I see you just added this as a trust to my profile: "This user has not provided any PII. By claiming I know who he is, he hopes to gain trust. We do not know who this user is. His claims of being doxxed in his home country are unproven."

1. I don't hope to gain trust by claiming you know who I am.
2. What do you mean claim of being doxxed in my home country?
3. The Linkedin literally has my full name.

I would imagine when I called the Romania police to tell them of your scam, they wouldn't be able to help me with just your "literal name" on Linkedin.

I therefore suggest everyone wait until they see proof this is not vapourware before they take anything this account says seriously.  

I will update when the US entity is out. We will also doxx the team in the coming weeks.

With that said, we are not selling anything so not sure how we can scam someone. People can only sign up with an email.

Regardless, I won't go over this again as it's already been discussed. I'll just get back when I have more updates.

New ledger stax devices got sold over a year ago and they just started shipping recently, this is not uncommon thing for a new products.
I always put wallets on the list when they claim to be open source, but this needs to be confirmed later.

I am not really upset about you for checking the list I posted, I even thanked you for that in another topic, and I made some updates and corrections with the list.

My apologies, I misunderstood. I'm happy that was helpful. After our discussion I also asked for some more feedback and opinions from advisors and team members and we're currently debating internally whether to just publish everything as open-source or source available. We honestly haven't taken a final decision yet but we should make one soon and I will update here.

I'm afraid this Ring wallet suffers from a similar problem that other hardware wallets seem to suffer from. A high price.

Website says 84 Euros not US dollars.

I would never pay $90 for some brand new hardware wallet. First of all because I wouldn't even know if all the bugs had been ironed out of its software. No way I could trust it except with very small amounts most likely. Just how it is.

Nice concept though. Carrying an entire hardware wallet on your finger. Using your phone to do transactions and it doesn't even need a battery. Pretty cool.

Also, i can't trust a device where if their app disappeared from the "app store" because of going out of business their device becomes a brick. I've seen that happen with other types of hardware...you say its' open source or something. well, i dont know if that would mean anything... :-X

but you and your partner seem to have the patience of a saint in dealing with some of the people in this thread. that's for sure!

just to give you an idea, i'm looking for a hardware wallet in the $9.99 price range.

  

Hey, first of all thanks for the kind words. Let me answer what you wrote:

1. Regarding currency, that's based on location, so if you're in US it's $ and if you're in Europe it's Euros. The price includes shipping and VAT as well so hence why it's a bit higher since of that price, depending on exact VAT (as it differs from country to country) of the 84 eur you get left with 66-71 eur and then you have to subtract shipping which is included as well which is ±8 eur on average for EU countries so about 58-63eur of which we then subtract product cost. Most providers show you a price and then on checkout they add VAT and shipping on top but we didn't really want to do that which is why we included it in price.
2. In general, I am aware that it is not the cheapest solution on the market. To be honest, since we're still a startup we don't have the same capacity of manufacturing as many pieces in a single batch and so we have a higher cost of product / item. Over time, as we grow and are able to manufacture larger and larger batches my hope is to be able to eventually reduce the price.

Now regarding the app disappearing from the app store because the company goes out of business, that's honestly a legitimate concern and it's one of the reasons why we're considering publishing everything open-source (including the apps), in which case even if the company goes out of business people would just be able to for example run their own apk and recover their wallets and move them somewhere else. Even if we end up deciding to publish it as source-available, you would still be able to do that since the company would have gone out of business in your example. With that said, we are gravitating more towards open-source at this moment either way and we're going to take a final decision in the coming weeks and announce it here.

Regarding the price range of the wallet you're looking for, I'm not sure if something like that exists at this moment. In the future we do have in plan of creating a more affordable option as well but in all honesty I don't think we could ever reach a $10 price range. If you include shipping then that's like 50-80% of the price, even if we disregard VAT and etc but even if you don't include shipping and VAT, I'm not sure if you can realistically manufacture a secure hardware wallet at that price. There may be a chance to do something in the $25-30 range if you go with something like a card since it's a simpler form factor but not sure if $10 is achievable in the very near future. Maybe years ahead as technology improves and production costs go down.

Good luck finding anything to buy for $9.99, I think you are going to need time travel machine for that  ::)
Meanwhile all you can buy is cheap Chinese watches on Aliexpress for that price, or maybe bunch of bananas , bread, paper and a pencil.
It's 2024.

Really cool concept but the potentials of attacks against people that are wearing these type of jewelry is definitely concerning, maybe if there's a way to customize the ring so it's totally not easily seen as something identifiable to be your product might be a big help, what I mean is that people should be able to add modifications to it that would make it look like any other ring on someone's finger, the lack of customization in my opinion is a security flaw because as what RickDecard, once it becomes a mainstream thing, scammers and people that have ill intentions will definitely try to do something about it once they recognize the ring.

thanks for trying to bring an innovating bitcoin product to market.


why would they need to do that? couldn't they just keep using the ringwallet like always? or is there some type of server infrastructure that would no longer exist if the company went out of businesses and thus nothing would work anymore?  :o

open source is better since then people can do bug fixes and things. even if the company is no longer around. and they can do it without any fear of repercussion.

$25 would be reasonable. since i think the conveniences of not having to plug something into a computer or recharge a battery are very big benefits plus the form factor is tiny you can take it anywhere. i would love to have something like that which i can interact with through my phone too.

but i'm confused about the "battery life" you say on the website it is 10 years. does it really even have a battery inside the ring? and what happens once that battery dies, it can't be replaced?

are you sure there are no software bugs that make it vulnerable to losing funds? big question right? any new product in this niche it seems like they all go through a process where people find bugs/exploits which then have to be fixed and ineviitably someone lost funds because of that exploit.

there was hardware wallet that used to sell for $9.99. but it had to be plugged into a usb port.

Hi guys, sorry for being inactive for so long but I've had some of the worst 2 weeks of my life. I found out my dog has terminal cancer which made him slowly lose his ability to walk or basically do anything, so I had to take care of him and carry him outside so he could actually go to the bathroom. He was a heavy dog, around 110 pounds. Unfortunately, he has already died. He was 12 and we did try all possible treatments but it was just too advanced. He had had surgery a couple months back to remove a tumour and thought he was fine but unfortunately he wasn't. I buried him on Monday and today was pretty much the first day I felt capable of coming and replying here.

So first of all, since this has been a discussion for a long time on this thread, the US company is out, it's actually been out for the past 2 weeks since the 6th of June, I just didn't have the energy or mindspace to come and post here. I'm honestly not sure how to link it here but the company is called Ringwallet Inc; registered as a C-Corp, in Delaware, with file number 3858518. I think you can search for it on the department of state website of delaware. So Vod, the company is out, it's actually been out for 2 weeks since I said it would, the filings should prove this as well, I honestly just didn't have the energy for this. So I would appreciate if you can remove the trustpilot rating as you said you would.

Moving beyond that


For now the ring has no recognisable elements anywhere on the ring, theres's a simple pictogram logo on the inside of it with the initials "rw" and that's it. In the future we may consider offering customisations but for now at least that's not viable because it would be a manufacturing nightmare.


Thanks


They could, but they would need some sort of UI to interact with the ring. Assuming the company goes out of business and the app isn't in google store anymore then you'd need to download your own apk so you can have the UI and interact with it.


On that note, the rest of the team has had time to talk in the past 2 weeks and for now the consensus seems to be that we'll be publishing everything (the apps, the ring firmware etc) as open-source (not source-available). The exact time hasn't been decided but it will be sometime before delivery of the first batch of products.


Yeah so regarding the first thing, about the 25$ wallet, it is our wish to have a very cheap affordable wallet, but please be aware that this is probably at least 6+ months away as first we want to launch the ring and make sure everything works well before moving on to other things.

There is no battery in the ring, the battery life of 10 years on the website is moreso due to legal requirements, in the sense that we need to include a minimum life expectancy of the product if used in normal conditions (i.e. not setting it on fire, diving with it at 200m etc) so that's what 10 years means, the minimum lifespan of the product. In theory, the chip itself is graded for a minimum lifespan of 20 years and can last even longer than that but we wanted to be on the safe side.

Regarding software bugs, obviously we did our best to make sure there's no software bugs, but even if they are there should be maybe UI bugs or things like that, not bugs that can make you lose your funds. Of course it's a new product but as I said above, at the end of the day, we figured that if we publish everything open-source then 1. people can just check the code themselves and if they find anything wrong message us and 2. will hopefully help in building some reputation


So anyway guys, that's pretty much it for the above. In terms of other updates, we've had a physical event in Cluj sometime last week; I didn't attend because was taking care of my dog in his last days but Christian our CMO did attend. We are continuing our fundraising round and I am hopeful it will be done in <60 days from now and moving forward we will slowly start sending out free rings to influencers and etc. We are now waiting on a batch of rings to come and have reached the final design for the boxes and waiting for them as well. Other than that, we should be publishing the apps in the app stores in the coming weeks as well, waiting for final approvals for developer accounts.

Anyway, I'll try to keep all of you updated but now that I've posted this I'm probably going to take a few more days for myself until I come back and answer more questions just to get in a better state of mind after the entire thing because he's been my dog for 12 years and in all honesty I still kind of feel like shit. Hope the above answers all the questions. Cheers.

Hey,

Sorry to hear hear that.

You can take as much time off for yourself as needed. Mental health comes first. The business isn't important by comparison.

you really do seem dedicated to great customer service and a great affordable product. i'm not so knowledgeable about all the competitors but i think you're going to have them beat on those two fronts for sure. good luck because i think you're going to have a winner here.  :D