Verifiable builds need attention. Only 3 of 68 Android wallets are verifiable

[dkbit98]

There is one alternative website I found for WalletScrutiny and it is called bitcoinbinary.org, interesting part is that one of bitcointalk moderators achow101 was testing wallets and participating in this exercise,
I don't know if this website is sponsored by Coinkite aka Coldcard, but they did receive 0.025 BTC donation from them and githuib page is posted on Coinkite github,
so it looks like ColdCard wanted to proved how their code is still reproducible even if it's not open source anymore.
Conclusion is that many wallets have bad documentation or incorrect build instructions so they couldn't be reproduced.


Github: https://github.com/coinkite/bitcoinbinary.org
Website: https://bitcoinbinary.org/

[1714688308]

1714688308

[1714688308]

1714688308

[1714688308]

1714688308

[1714688308]

1714688308

[giszmo]

I feel like bitcoinbinary was launched as a reaction to WalletScrutiny's review of ColdCard. It's @NVK's project.

[dkbit98]

I feel like bitcoinbinary was launched as a reaction to WalletScrutiny's review of ColdCard. It's @NVK's project.

Yeah it's his project, and he even ''donated'' himself, but it appears he now removed that info from the page bottom (maybe because of my remarks), however it was archived on time Coinkite = Coldcard = NVK
I don't think there is anything wrong with some (healthy) competition and it can help improve both of your websites.

btw ColdCard wallet is not open source anymore, but he still claims differently on his website... maybe he will change that in future also


https://coldcard.com/

[pooya87]

I don't think there is anything wrong with some (healthy) competition and it can help improve both of your websites.

As long as the site is not created to advertise certain project(s) and as long as they are giving correct information instead of falsified claims, things can remain healthy otherwise that's another case of why centralized "review" sites are generally bad.

[giszmo]

btw ColdCard wallet is not open source anymore, but he still claims differently on his website... maybe he will change that in future also

Cringy :/ I used the term "open source" in a sloppy way, too but once somebody complained, I replaced it everywhere with "public source", as that is what I need to reproduce binaries.

As long as the site is not created to advertise certain project(s) and as long as they are giving correct information instead of falsified claims, things can remain healthy otherwise that's another case of why centralized "review" sites are generally bad.

WalletScrutiny is certainly not created to advertise any specific products. I did work for Mycelium before but I quit because of this conflict of interest and I'm pretty open about my disagreements in direction when it comes to shitcoins. Ideally WS would be easy to fork though but I don't dare yet to make the reviews themselves creative commons or something. The framework and tools are open source already though.

[dkbit98]

Cringy :/ I used the term "open source" in a sloppy way, too but once somebody complained, I replaced it everywhere with "public source", as that is what I need to reproduce binaries.

I don't know why NVK is pushing this open source label so hard, but it's crystal clear that you can't have common clause license in your code and still advertise code of your device as open source.
Some people also reported that NVK blocked them on twitter so they can't comment on any of coldcard twitter posts, and he is hating all other hardware wallet devices...

Is this “Open Source”?
No.

https://commonsclause.com/

[giszmo]

Some people also reported that NVK blocked them on twitter so they can't comment on any of coldcard twitter posts, and he is hating all other hardware wallet devices...

#metoo

[dkbit98]

WalletScrutiny website was recently shut down due to a DMCA takedown notice, and we it was unavailable for few days but now it's working again.
I don't know why anyone would have a problem with website like this, but maybe some closed source wallets and centralized exchanges are involved with this.
If you want to follow what happened follow their twitter account @WalletScrutiny.

[o_e_l_e_o]

So because they point out that a custodial wallet is custodial, that custodial wallet attempted frivolous legal action because they didn't like someone pointing out that they are custodial?

What incredibly scummy and shady behavior, but unfortunately anyone who is already using a custodial wallet is unlikely to swayed by said behavior.

[Yamane_Keto]

WalletScrutiny website was recently shut down due to a DMCA takedown notice, and we it was unavailable for few days but now it's working again.
I don't know why anyone would have a problem with website like this, but maybe some closed source wallets and centralized exchanges are involved with this.
If you want to follow what happened follow their twitter account @WalletScrutiny.

The power of these "custodial exchanges" and the time that a lawyer took to litigation and all this for open source code?
I will download the website files, run it offline, and will everywhere give Foxbit (which was the reason for DCMA) a negative rating.

187 wallet with No Source! and 591 Custodial! All this in a decentralized industry.

[dkbit98]

So because they point out that a custodial wallet is custodial, that custodial wallet attempted frivolous legal action because they didn't like someone pointing out that they are custodial?

We should clearly name those custodial wallets and tell more people to avoid using them.
WalletScrutiny received this legal actions two times so far, first time it was from Mercado Bitcoin, and now they received it from Foxbit.
Both of this services are located in Brazil, that makes me think there is some connection between them, and this was targeted attack.

[giszmo]

MercadoBitcoin's review was removed due to a DMCA takedown notice and I had forgotten to put it back up until the Foxbit takedown notice.

Today the latter just had its deadline to take court action expired, so I will re-instantiate it, too.

[NotATether]

MercadoBitcoin's review was removed due to a DMCA takedown notice and I had forgotten to put it back up until the Foxbit takedown notice.

Today the latter just had its deadline to take court action expired, so I will re-instantiate it, too.

Excuse me, but what the fuck is going on? Are some companies apparently angry at your website or something?

[Flexystar]

First of all thank you for the great work you are doing with the wallet scrutiny, I just stumbled upon your thread while I was reading through this section. It is amazing how you started your journey since 2019 and have already sirupted lot of information about various wallets. I think CoinBase is now even worst at this point. The user base is has outgrown the previously published number which means there are more and more users who just want to use nice looking apps, with easy to handle request. I mean pick a wallet which is non custodial, they have basic UI, (though its advancing) people are not used to it somehow. May be they like to share their private keys with the custodial wallets. Sadly the number of such wallets is huge which makes us think there is such under education about the "Not your keys, not your bitcoin".

So because they point out that a custodial wallet is custodial, that custodial wallet attempted frivolous legal action because they didn't like someone pointing out that they are custodial?

We should clearly name those custodial wallets and tell more people to avoid using them.
WalletScrutiny received this legal actions two times so far, first time it was from Mercado Bitcoin, and now they received it from Foxbit.
Both of this services are located in Brazil, that makes me think there is some connection between them, and this was targeted attack.

I am sure this is targeted attack only. They are just trying to take down the information and do not want to get hampered with their brand. This is what makes them afraid. Since you are openly stating the information about the custodial wallets they would lose the client base. Not sure how you are going to fight back but definitely under information acts this isn't illegal. Good luck.