Bitcoin Forum
July 16, 2024, 12:48:56 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
  Home Help Search Login Register More  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
1  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 56 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: June 14, 2024, 12:42:09 PM
New Trezor Safe 5 announced. Already listed on our website comparing 58 different Hardware Wallets.

Some Highlights:
- Touch and bigger screen with Gorilla Glass
- Secure Element
- BTC Only variant
2  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 24, 2024, 01:05:20 AM
Yes, I saw the Trezor discount after my post, but not added it because the discount wasn't for a HW.

Thanks for the bug report !!!.

Pizza Day Discounts
Nothing from Trezor and legder?
There weren't any when Maxi made that comment [I double-checked to make sure he didn't miss any].

There's a minor bug on the table that whenever I scroll down, it changes some or all of the active links [beneath the fixed row] in either the first, second, or both of the first two rows into inactive links: Screencast
- Tested in Chrome and Firefox.
3  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 56 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 22, 2024, 11:40:29 AM
Pizza Day Discounts
- Coinkite: 10% off all products
- Keystone: 8% off on Keystone 3 Pro
- CoolWallet Pro: 10% off with free shipping
- Ellipal Titan 2.0: U$S 40 off
4  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 13, 2024, 12:47:40 AM
Some misconceptions you have:

1. Nunchuk ( is not a NFC card, is an open source software wallet that can connect with multiple HWs. Like Sparrow or Specter. They allow users to don't trust on the software of the HW manufacturer by using a different software wallet to connect with the HW in a 100% airgapped mode. I am not talking about using them to generate and store your seedphrase, I am talking to use them as coordinators or readonly wallets.
2. Trezor offers a btc-only firmware.
3. If a HW doesn't support multi-sig, is correct to say that is less secure than a HW with the same features but not multi-sig support. Multi-sig support increases the security of a HW.
4. Other HWs are not a wearable, so people don't expect to use them on the street. A good practice is recommend people to not put your wallet in your pocket and move with it. That's why I said that users of your wallet (and any other) should be advised to only wear it if you only have funds to spend on the daily basis.

Regarding you plan to be open source in the future, I think is a bad idea to not be open source since day zero. Nobody should trust in any company with closed firmware and mobile apps. The company could just send to themselves the seedphrase you generate on the HW, and you are not going to know, because all the code is closed.

1. Trezor, Ledger etc are neither airgapped nor btc-only firmware. The only real difference could be multisig but I genuinely don't understand why you say it would be less secure? As for people forcing you to sign a transaction on the street, I seriously doubt that's a casual occurence, sure, there are edge-cases and dangerous locations where it could happen but it's just that, an improbable edge case. I genuinely believe it is much safer to have a ringwallet than any other software wallet (1), and in regards to comparisons with Ledger, Trezor etc the only differnece is you would have it on you, but say you have 2 rings, one you keep at home and one you keep on you. How is the one left at home any less safe than the likes of Ledger or Trezor? Considering it uses Shamir, the chip has a higher EAL rating and there's no bluetooth, wifi, inputs etc it's arguably safer than ledger or trezor.

To answer the question directly, we obviously don't recommend you go walk in a cartel-controlled neighbourhood with a ringwallet holding $1M on it, but that's completely unrelated to the technology or even the ring. You shouldn't go walk in that neighbourhoud, period. And if you do, you shouldn't have anything valuable on you, period. Because chances are whatever you have will be lost if you don't end up dead either way. Whether you have a trezor, ledger, ringwallet, nunchuck etc, the same would happen. That's not normal use case though. I highly doubt you'll be held at gunpoint on a random street/boulevard in the vast majority of countries for you to transfer the contents of your ringwallet. Especially because this is not something instant, it would take at the very least several minutes for the entire thing to happen; time in which what no one notices? It's just highly highly unlikely. And that's not even mentioning the fact that the ring has 0 markings on it of any way, there's just a very small logo on the inside of the ring. That's all.

2. Nunchuck is also a NFC card so not sure how it's safer but that's not important; I doubt that nunchuck can be run on bluewallet or sparrow software; both of which are software-wallets and genuinely less safe than a hardware solution; pretty much any hardware solution.

As for the open source part, that I genuinely understand and agree with, but as mentioned, our plan is to make it open-source, I just want us to have some time-limited legal protection from competitors just forking our code the very next day. As for us having a copy of all generated private keys, we will be using the official industry standard SLIP-0039 implementation of Shamir's Secret from Satoshi Labs which is open source, the only difference being we store it on Ace Cards as opposed to a piece of paper. Either way, with a bit of luck on the legal side I'm hopeful that it won't be long before releasing the entire code as open-source.

Basically my only wish is for us to have a 2-3 year time horizon on every release before it can be forked in a commercially product, that's all. Which is a fair thing to want I believe. 
5  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 12, 2024, 01:12:16 PM
1. Do you plan to be honest with your clients and say "please don't use our wallet with large amount of funds"? I disagree that your wallet has the same level of security compared to other wallets. Some missing security features you have: 100% airgapped, multisig, btc-only firmware, etc. Any guy on the street can force you to sign a transaction with your ring and you would lose all your funds.
2- I am talking about compatibility with open source software wallets like Sparrow, Nunchuk, Bluewallet, etc. Given that your code is close source, users have to trust 100% on you. How do they know that you are not a bad actor and have a copy of all generated private keys?

To be clear, you are not the only HW with these issues, Tangem and others have the same problems.

Hey, so let's talk a bit about this.
1. Our initial purpose is indeed to target either a) existing crypto users who don't use a hardware wallet already because they're too complicated b) new entrants in the crypto market and c) experienced users who want to have some amount of money with them on-the-go and have an easy way using it. This, however, is not to say that the security of the ring is bad. It's just our user target, at least initially. Let's break it down a bit.
  • There is only a single vector of attack, namely NFC. There is no bluetooth, no internet, no inputs etc.
  • The chip itself is certified as EAL6+, just for comparison purposes, Ledger is EAL5+. Furthermore, if somebody tries to say inject malicious code, initiate an unnaproved transaction etc through the only existing vector of attack (NFC), then the chip automatically burns itself if it is a real risk since these are chips used normally in bank cards, that's what they were initially designed for.
  • Lastly, in terms of backup we use Shamir's Secret Sharing through the Ace Cards. This is arguably, at this moment, the most advanced and secure form of actually backing up a wallet at this point. Ledger doesn't even have the option for this, the only other one I'm aware of who does have this option is Trezor and even then, you must write them down on multiple pieces of paper; whereas we allow users to store them on Ace Cards, which is easier. Now, considering that even if somebody say steals your ringwallet they cannot use it unless they also simultaneously do the following: a) steal your paired phone, b) have your phone password c) have your app password and perhaps d) unless you go home, restore the wallet and move the money.
That is all to say, sure, that's our target audience. But at the very minimum this respects at least the same levels of security that any other hardware wallet does, if not more.

2. Ok so for the second question I am genuinely not sure if I understood it correctly, so I will try to answer what I understood.
a) If you mean that our software won't be compatible with other wallet like Ledger and Trezor, I believe that is exactly how Trezor and Ledger functions as well, I'm not aware of hardware wallet software that is cross-compatible with other devices.
b) Initially the code is closed-source, yet, but that is because we are waiting on our lawyers for a way to attribute a license to our code that will protect us for say 2 years from people using the code commercially, giving us time to work on a newer version before competitors can just fork our code. That is all to say, our end goal is to make the code open-source, and release new versions as open source constantly, just with a 2 or 3 year limitation against using it for commercial purposes. Either way, just to be clear, Tangem for example has 0 open-source code and as far as I am aware, 0 intention of actually making the code open-source. So even if we were to take that route, which I don't think we will, it's not something never seen before.
6  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 12, 2024, 01:06:44 AM
I see two big issues on your product:
1- The idea of a ring with a wallet inside sounds good but not secure. As you mentioned on the other thread, you shouldn't put your life savings there. So, you are creating a product to protect small amount of funds.
The problem is that people is not going to know that and they think that a HW is always secure.
2- Correct me if I am wrong. It seems you are creating the classic HW without any open source third-party software wallet compatibility. So, users are forced to trust you and use your closed-source software wallet in a single-sig setup.

[edited out]
Sure, those are very fair questions so let me try and answer them all. Some of it is still not out there because we only recently started publishing things about the company, so we will be slowly phasing out various updates and more information about the product over the next couple of months.

Intiially, the ring will support BTC, SOL, ETH and EVM-compatible blockchains. This means, upon release and delivery of presale orders. Unfortunately, it means we won't have things like Tron or Multivers upon release; however we will be adding all the relevant blockchains in a timely manner. In regards to EVM, we will probably include the large ones directly with the release like BSC, Polygon, Optimism etc. Some of the lesser-known ones we might phase out as well.

Regarding the backup (Ace Cards), their sole and exclusive functionality is to act as a backup. They have a different chip inside of them as compared to the wallet (ring) and they're not meant to be a wallet because we think that would defeat their purpose a bit. Ideally, these are things you set up and then store somewhere securely (i.e hide them somewhere) and never use them unless you need to restore your wallet. If you were asking this in the sense of whether we will also have a card-form hardware wallet like Tangem does, the honest answer is I don't know; it's quite honestly not a focus for us right now. First we want to launch and ship the rings along with the Ace Cards; those will also be the only 2 initial products we will have on our website.

After that, we already have a second product in the pipeline which with a bit of luck we should be able to release & start shipping before end of Q1 next year, but I can tell you it's not a card wallet. It's naturally still a wallet, and it is also a wearable, but we'll release more info about this only after we ship out the initial batch of rings.

Of course, I see that you are mostly just responding to satscraper, yet as a courtesy, it is probably best to keep your responses fairly succinct in threads like this (and maybe OP should have created this one as a self-moderated thread, but did not).. I did see that in the last couple of days you guys have created a Ringwallet forum thread (also not self-moderated), which also is receiving some pushback and skepticism, and I have not looked at any of that thread in detail (even though it is so far a short thread, and not that I am any kind of a technical expert), yet it might be a bit early in terms of coming to too many conclusions if the product (or products) is not quite in a released stage.. but still good to refer folks to either that thread that you guys created or some other locations that might answer the questions.

I see, sorry for that, I didn't really give it much thought. And yes we have that existing thread which wasn't very well done to be perfectly honest, we will probably make a more professional one a bit later on. And yes we did receive some skepticism which is generally fair and a good exercise, I did my best to answer all the questions there and will continue to do so. The product is not live yet as of now and cannot be ordered, perhaps I'll come back in this thread after there's more things made public. Thanks for the answer nonetheless.
7  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Comparing Inheritance Services on: May 10, 2024, 03:50:33 PM
Good advise, thanks.

A statement that protects you against legal disputes by showing the scope of your responsibility [in a clear manner] to the visitors [e.g. dealing with ignorant people who love to sue literally anybody].
- There's always the possibility of losing something as an indirect/direct result of using any of the services and wallets that are listed on your website.
8  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Comparing Inheritance Services on: May 09, 2024, 11:06:49 PM
What do you mean with a disclaimer?
- BTW, considering that more of these services are going to pop out in the future, perhaps you should consider adding a disclaimer to the footer area of the list in question.[/sup]
9  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Comparing Inheritance Services on: May 09, 2024, 08:04:27 PM
New Bitcoin Inheritance Service added to our comparison: Zengo Pro
10  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 08, 2024, 07:29:25 PM
Thanks, I will add it to my backlog

I have another hardware wallet you can add to your list, and it's not new device, but just recently I found they are offering something different from other manufacturers.
This device is called HASHwallet and it is in form of standard credit card with integrated EAL6+ secure chip.
Unique for Hashwallet is that they dont have any firmware updates ever, there is unlimited number of wallets and seed phrases per device, they have key recovery (different from ledger) and inheritance system.

Official links:

I am not recommending or advertising this product, please do your own research.
11  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 07, 2024, 01:55:04 AM
Hi. I wrote an article with all the lessons learnt about how to choose a hardware wallet during the last year while building The Bitcoin Hole.
12  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: May 01, 2024, 06:53:32 PM
You are right, thanks. Added Grid+ SafeCards to the Seed Backup Solutions comparison:

Added Grid+ Lattice1
I am not a fan of this Lattice1 hardware wallet and it's price, and I think it is more focused on ethereum than on bitcoin,
but since you added it already maybe you could also add their more affordable product that is used as a seed backup solution, and it's called Safepack.
Safepack is sold in pack of two cards and price is $40:

I still prefer Satochip card instead for this purpose.
13  Bitcoin / Wallet software / Re: 22 Bitcoin Software Wallets, compared feature by feature on: April 29, 2024, 06:14:21 PM
Added Zeus Wallet.
14  Bitcoin / Hardware wallets / Re: 55 Hardware Wallets, compared feature by feature on: April 25, 2024, 12:47:15 AM
Added Grid+ Lattice1
15  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Comparing Inheritance Services on: April 24, 2024, 12:59:50 PM
Now you can see Cypherock Cover in our Bitcoin Inheritance Services comparison.
16  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Comparing Inheritance Services on: April 15, 2024, 06:20:45 PM
Thanks. I will take a look

Cypherock is about to launch an "Estate Recovery" feature for their X1 hardware wallet that they claim solves the problem of non-custodial inheritance. There's a description of how it works on their blog at

Another option to consider adding to the list  Grin
17  Economy / Service Discussion / Re: Comparing Inheritance Services on: April 14, 2024, 03:23:38 PM
Thanks for the feedback. Given that I am always showing the minimum price to use the inheritance features, I renamed the row to "Minimum Yearly Price"

Thank you for creating this list. I find Liana is interesting since it's open source solution without dependency on third party. I also notice other service such as Jinca offer multiple pricing, while your list only mention "$45 69,428 SATS". So i would suggest you to mention that service have multiple tier/pricing.

BTW, I am starting the research to also include Bitcoin Keeper to the comparison.
18  Economy / Service Discussion / Comparing Inheritance Services on: April 13, 2024, 01:40:31 AM
Bitcoin Inheritance. A complex topic, right? But every year, we have more and more ideas and solutions.

We compared 5 different Bitcoin Inheritance Services: Casa, Jinca, Liana, Nunchuk and Unchained

You can also see the open source database here:

A couple of weeks ago, several interesting threads about this topic happened on X. I recommend to read them, you will learn a lot.
19  Bitcoin / Wallet software / Re: 22 Bitcoin Software Wallets, compared feature by feature on: April 04, 2024, 07:58:29 PM
Good catch. Thanks. Confirmed on the release notes that all the models are supporting taproot.

I think you need to make few small corrections for Safepal hardware wallets, since they are now apparently supporting Taproot addresses.
I don't know if all devices are supported and I don't own Safepal wallets to confirm this myself.
20  Bitcoin / Wallet software / Re: 22 Bitcoin Software Wallets, compared feature by feature on: April 04, 2024, 02:04:01 AM
Added Bitcoin Core to the website, now comparing 22 different Bitcoin Software Wallets.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!