Bitcoin Security - My look at the KeepKey

[benperrin117]

This week I tried out the KeepKey hardware wallet for the first time. Here's an overview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wWID4Mpmg4

[~Bitcoin~]

Very nice review video, i have heard about keepkey as an alternative hardware wallet to trezor. It has really nice userinterface on device too, just checked their site but they seem to have flat shipping fee

DHL (3-9 Business Days): $39.00

Almost half the price of device 

[Kprawn]

Looks like a great hardware wallet alternative for the Trezor. What I like, was the multiple currencies that it supports and the real-time

conversion that can be done between these currencies, within the app. I would also want it to display other local currencies as a added

feature included into the device. The security looks good.. 

[thejaytiesto]

I should look at one of those devices, but ultimately i think it's better to have several different backups on different media, including a paper wallet encrypted with 38 and wrapped on plastic, and even encrypted 7z file in different cloud storage, email providers etc, so you have different points of failure. You should put 100% on trust on a trezor type device.

[chesatochi]

Thank you for this nice review about this hardware wallet, first time I heard about this one. The price is not so cheap, I just checked on the website, also what seem very interesting about this one is the support of many cryptocurrencies.

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

KeepKey forked Trezor source code and built a business off of SatoshiLabs original hard work. I think you should support and buy Trezor instead.

[yayayo]

KeepKey forked Trezor source code and built a business off of SatoshiLabs original hard work. I think you should support and buy Trezor instead.

If Trezor was cheaper, a lot of people would actually do this. Existing hardware wallets may be convenient for some users, who are afraid of malware on their computer. Personally I'm not that enthusiastic about hardware wallets as a longterm storage solution. Reason is that you effectively rely on the continued services of startup companies. If your hardware wallet is breaking down, you must rely on replacement hardware that might not be available when the companies have vanished. In addition, native support for these wallets is not widespread, so you have to rely on app services as well.

Paper wallets are a much cheaper and even more secure alternative to hardware wallets. You can print as many you want and store them in different places to minimize the risk of loss. Of course, you can encrypt them as well.

I would use a hardware wallet only, if it would work as a standalone Bitcoin wallet, meaning that you could receive and broadcast transactions with it without the need for a secondary device. That would be very convenient.

ya.ya.yo!

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

KeepKey forked Trezor source code and built a business off of SatoshiLabs original hard work. I think you should support and buy Trezor instead.

If Trezor was cheaper, a lot of people would actually do this. Existing hardware wallets may be convenient for some users, who are afraid of malware on their computer. Personally I'm not that enthusiastic about hardware wallets as a longterm storage solution. Reason is that you effectively rely on the continued services of startup companies. If your hardware wallet is breaking down, you must rely on replacement hardware that might not be available when the companies have vanished. In addition, native support for these wallets is not widespread, so you have to rely on app services as well.

Paper wallets are a much cheaper and even more secure alternative to hardware wallets. You can print as many you want and store them in different places to minimize the risk of loss. Of course, you can encrypt them as well.

I would use a hardware wallet only, if it would work as a standalone Bitcoin wallet, meaning that you could receive and broadcast transactions with it without the need for a secondary device. That would be very convenient.

ya.ya.yo!

Paper wallets can be dangerous for new bitcoin users because you expose your private keys when spending and there is always the change problem. Paper wallets are not safer than hardware wallets quite the reverse. As long as a hardware wallet user keeps the seed safe if the hardware wallet provider happened to go out of business the seed can be recovered in Mycelium. There is no downside to using a Ledger Nano S or Trezor.

[yayayo]

KeepKey forked Trezor source code and built a business off of SatoshiLabs original hard work. I think you should support and buy Trezor instead.

If Trezor was cheaper, a lot of people would actually do this. Existing hardware wallets may be convenient for some users, who are afraid of malware on their computer. Personally I'm not that enthusiastic about hardware wallets as a longterm storage solution. Reason is that you effectively rely on the continued services of startup companies. If your hardware wallet is breaking down, you must rely on replacement hardware that might not be available when the companies have vanished. In addition, native support for these wallets is not widespread, so you have to rely on app services as well.

Paper wallets are a much cheaper and even more secure alternative to hardware wallets. You can print as many you want and store them in different places to minimize the risk of loss. Of course, you can encrypt them as well.

I would use a hardware wallet only, if it would work as a standalone Bitcoin wallet, meaning that you could receive and broadcast transactions with it without the need for a secondary device. That would be very convenient.

ya.ya.yo!

Paper wallets can be dangerous for new bitcoin users because you expose your private keys when spending and there is always the change problem. Paper wallets are not safer than hardware wallets quite the reverse. As long as a hardware wallet user keeps the seed safe if the hardware wallet provider happened to go out of business the seed can be recovered in Mycelium. There is no downside to using a Ledger Nano S or Trezor.

Your article seems heavily biased to me or might be even classified as a pure advertisement for hardware wallets. It's not objective information. When used correctly, paper wallets are definitely safer than hardware wallets. The "change problem" is not a problem at all, it's just a matter of knowledge. You can't argue against paper wallets taking the perspective of a totally uninformed user. You can always split your funds across hundreds or thousands of paper wallets at almost no cost, thereby greatly reducing the overall risk.

With hardware wallets there's always a dependency on third parties. Denying that means spreading disinformation. You need to use a certain hardware/software/app of a startup company to recover your funds. This hardware/software/app may become unavailable in future. That's why hardware wallets are unsuitable for long term storage of Bitcoin.

You talked about "keeping the seed safe". If you need to keep the seed safe independently of the hardware wallet, you are effectively maintaining another paper wallet to secure your hardware wallet. What's the security advantage then compared to directly generating ordinary paper wallets?

ya.ya.yo!

[TheWallStreetCrew]

CASE has something like this with a biometric lock. If you have bitcoin and you are not using one of these you are nits.