Wallet is the weakest link?

[vtk]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

[Smith871]

Yeah one can say that risk is there but I can say in simple words for example if you have money in your banks and later on some war or misfortune can happen and your bank go for loss which seems not to be so same is in the case of wallet link it is not necessarily as weak as we think of it

[davis196]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

Yes,but all the bitcoin users have to freedom to choose not to use online wallets and store their bitcoins on their computers.But what if your computer gets stolen or broken?There`s no 100% security.
There are lots  of old topics about the same subject,why are you asking this,OP?
Where you scammed by some online wallet service? 

[SUDARMONO]

if replacing fiat rights is entirely possible it will not happen in a country, but bitcoin can substitute fiat money for those who shop with their payments shop with bitcoin, and mostly used for online stores, bitcoin is great.

[mocacinno]

davis196 is right, it's completely up to the user wether they chose to use an online wallet or not.

There are plenty of desktop and hardware wallets out there that are extremely user-friendly. There is no reason why a new user should ever resort to storing their funds in an online wallet or exchange.
I've said it before and i'll say it again: if you're not the (only) one in controll of your private keys, you're not in controll of your funds!

Sure, if you use a desktop, paper or hardware wallet, it's up to YOU to make sure it's properly encrypted and backupped! if you fail to keep your wallet's seed or private key a secret, or you're ignorant enough to keep only one copy, you only have yourself to blame if you lose everything.

[Lorilikes]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

It's getting easier thanks to wallets like Jaxx who easily give its users their private keys.  Then it's at least YOUR money.

[tyuner4]

Yes, your view is correct. This is why it is important to store Bitcoin in a wallet you own totally. It is not recommended to store Bitcoin in online wallet and exchanges where you do not owe the private key.

[Reatim]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

That's why we preached that get a wallet that you have total control of the private keys. Wallet providers always try their best to make it secure but we still have our responsibility on how to protect yourself from such malicious intent of stealing your coins. Used strong passwords, keep your private key to a safe location. We are our own bank so its up to us how to secure and protect it.

[nareshrohra]

Yes, there has been no report as of now, about any vulnerability in the blockchain technology itself. Most of the attacks have been on exchanges or wallets i.e. the end points. Offline wallets are good way to keep them secure from internet hackers. But, you have to physically secure the storage in that case

[CryptoBry]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets? How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

There will always be risks in anything we do and even the things we don't do so cryptocurrency is not exempted on that premise. Now, as to cryptocurrency, most of the victims are people who are still new to the game or those who did not spend time to learn more on how to protect their assets. There are many choices we can use to minimize those risks. As long as we are online, these risks can not be totally eliminated as even big companies who spent money millions on their firewall and security can still be victims of hacking. Sometimes we can be at the mercy of these hackers and scammers.

[saenko]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

So you can talk about any technology to protect our finances. Nothing has been done thoroughly, which means that there is always a risk. Therefore, to change wallets to something else, well, only a consumable and difficult-to-do business.

[jseverson]

Simply not relying on online wallets already add a layer to your security. You don't really need a third party to keep your Bitcoins for you, especially since they're not going to be able to do anything anyway if you run into a problem. You're much better off using desktop wallets such as Electrum, or you could even take it a step further and get a hardware wallet. You don't own your Bitcoins if you don't have their private key.

The point of Bitcoin is to not have to rely on trust unlike fiat. Get a wallet, store your coins, secure it. You have 100% control, but you also take 100% of the responsibilities in keeping it safe. It's not even that hard, even for non-technical users, or what you call ordinary people. Most hacks involving Bitcoin appears to have stemmed from social engineering of some sort, so you really only have to be smart.

[RautK]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

Not all wallets are centralized... I do not think wallets are the weakest links if you choose a good one that gives you complete control of your private keys..

[Kikai]

It depends how you use it, usually is not the product that may be the weak link, but the method

[Lucius]

If you want to own BTC you need to have address at which you will receive/keep it and for that you need wallet.You can choose different types of wallets but most of users go for online wallets because is very easy to create an account and start to receive/send coins.But such wallets are the most risky especially if no additional protection methods are used like 2FA, and also the users are not in possession of their private keys.

Desktop wallets are much safer,but they are also exposed to hacking just because you use them online-and without adequate protection of PC you can lose your money in a way of some keylogger install on your PC and steals your wallet password.

Hardware or paper wallets are probably the safest way for safekeeping BTC and others cryptocoins,but hardware wallet is not free-you need to buy it and paper wallet is not something most users want/know how to do.

[Pursuer]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

there is no such thing called "wallet providers" in bitcoin. don't confuse the centralized cervices such as coinbase and xapo with a bitcoin wallet, they are not at all a wallet.

and about the rest of the wallet, what you may call "wallet provider" is a completely open source and peer reviewed and tested code which handles the wallet security. there can not be any issues in the old wallets that have been around for a while. also "hack" is meaningless for such projects that are open source. you download the source and you protect yourself from then on.

[bitllionaire]

Simply not relying on online wallets already add a layer to your security. You don't really need a third party to keep your Bitcoins for you, especially since they're not going to be able to do anything anyway if you run into a problem. You're much better off using desktop wallets such as Electrum, or you could even take it a step further and get a hardware wallet. You don't own your Bitcoins if you don't have their private key.

The point of Bitcoin is to not have to rely on trust unlike fiat. Get a wallet, store your coins, secure it. You have 100% control, but you also take 100% of the responsibilities in keeping it safe. It's not even that hard, even for non-technical users, or what you call ordinary people. Most hacks involving Bitcoin appears to have stemmed from social engineering of some sort, so you really only have to be smart.

I think we have to trust on our bitcoin wallet, To me as I personally have the strategy to use different online wallet whenever I have more bitcoin, but usually I use 2FA which give me some extra protection to my wallet. I think it is the best way to keep your bitcoin more safe and secure in an online wallet. I think for more security you can also use desktop wallet which is more secure as compare to online wallet.

[squatter]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

If you control your own private keys, you don't need to worry about what happens to wallet providers. I assume you're talking about web wallet providers like Xapo and Coinbase, right? Then indeed, they can be hacked and you could lose everything. It's much safer to download a local desktop wallet like Core (or Electrum for a lightweight wallet) that gives you control over your coins.
 

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

I think BTC for day-to-day purchasing will function much like Venmo and similar apps. It will likely be powered by the Lightning Network, and users will largely not understand how it works. But I don't think BTC will ever replace fiat currencies. That would only happen if governments themselves disappeared entirely.

[bitart]

For non-technical holders of BTC (i.e. the mass of the BTC population), the risk of inanonymity and centralisation still there: as they have to entirely rely on their wallet providers? If such wallet providers are hacked or meddled with their users, the users won't have anyway to protect themselves or anyone to make a claim on? Their fund in BTC is entire at the mercy of the wallets?

How you think BTC would work for the ordinary people in the future to replace their current existing financial assets and management with fiat currencies?

Not all wallets are centralized... I do not think wallets are the weakest links if you choose a good one that gives you complete control of your private keys..

The weakest link is always the human. You can have the best hardware wallet if you don't know how to use it. You can have your private key hidden somewhere, you can write down your seed on a paper and laminate it, and hide it too, if you take a photo of your seed and store it on your phone (just in case if it's urgently needed...) then it's a big mistake also...
Every kind of wallet have it's own weakness and strength.
I use hardware wallets to store and web wallets to spend (and not vica-versa). You just need to know the level of the risk and act accordingly. Web wallets are also fine (despite of you don't have your private key) for a purpose of spending smaller amounts.

[bubblebit]

When I was a newbie myself, I have to admit I was careless and doing research for what is the best wallet provider is not my priority. Things change now, as for now more wallet provider has given extreme protection, security and assurance of great customer service.

It is up to us now what risk we take, online wallet are risky if the team behind it is also unreliable. As I’ve been using this service for a year with outstanding customer service, I don’t see them as a weakness but the other way around.

If you have doubts, it’s better to used hardware wallet if available. And don’t just blame wallets, be a better users as the saying “safety first”. Do extra thing to give more layer of protection of your bitcoin.