ownrwallet

[hugeblack]

Has any of you previously downloaded this wallet^[1] or have doubts about it? The first time I saw this wallet several months ago, unfortunately It is a closed source wallet and there are a lot of apprehensions about it.
But so far I have not seen any negative trust/review towards them.

They asked me to design signatures so I wanted to ask the community about the dangers of using this wallet? Please give me a rating of 10.
Especially, since it appears that they will start a signature campaign and may pay some money to advertise their wallet.

[1] https://ownrwallet.com/

[DaveF]

I have installed and it looks good and does what it says it does at least on the android version. Will it pull me away from my current multicoin wallet. Probably not, but that is because I have been using the old one for a while and I am used it.

I would have no issues doing a signature / wearing a signature for it.

You are going to get a lot of it's closed source don't use it comments.
With that being said, --> in my opinion<-- for trivial amounts it's not important closed vs open source for a mobile wallet.
I have gotten a lot of heat over time for saying this, and have started threads about it.

Would I store life altering amounts of crypto in it. No.
Would I store a nice vacation amounts of crypto in it. No.
Would I store enough crypto for a quick weekend away. Probably.

But that's my threshold, yours might be different.

So 8 out of 10 for doing it. 9.5 out of 10 if you feel you can ignore the closed source is evil people.

-Dave

[HCP]

Looking past the "closed source" thing for a second... It's great that they're "licensed" and all:

OWNR WALLET holds two licenses allowing us to exchange virtual currencies against fiat (FVR000645) and provide a virtual currency wallet service (FRK000559). For more details, feel free to check our Terms of Service.

But this is the bit that concerns me:

OWNR WALLET is a private limited company based in Estonia.

Not sure what legal recourse one would have regarding a company based in Estonia?


Additionally, the fees seem quite excessive... and a little vague:

Transaction Fees
The User agrees to pay OWNR the Transaction fee for each completed order. The fee makes $7 per order, regardless of the amount. We may also charge some percent of the transaction amount, which varies depending on the region and asset price volatility.

Noting of course that this for "fiat" transactions (not simply moving crypto in or out)


Also, the wallet has a limited number of countries that they are able to conduct fiat->crypto transactions with: https://ownrwallet.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/44001816455


I'm sure there will be "open source or not at all" users... but I wouldn't have any issues with users promoting this wallet.

Still, competition is healthy, so good on them... as with DaveF, I'd probably not use it... not because of the closed source thing, but simply because I don't need a "multicoin" wallet, and my current wallet solutions on desktop/mobile are adequate to my needs (and open source )

Hard to put a firm number on "the dangers of using this wallet"... No better/worse than other multicoin offerings like Exodus/Jaxx/Coinomi would be my "rating".

[hendra147]

Also, the wallet has a limited number of countries that they are able to conduct fiat->crypto transactions with: https://ownrwallet.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/44001816455

seem not support in my country, but if i read all review here
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.ownrwallet.wallet&showAllReviews=true

he get 4,5 star seem a trusted wallet, and all his customer says a good too.

[ABCbits]

After looking at their website, here are my thoughts

1. Unreasonable rates

Buy crypto at a reasonable rate

http://preev.com/ shows current rate is $9325, but their rate is $10264.82

2. For closed-source wallet, the amount of features is quite good.

3. Looking at their wallet permission on Google Play website, it's pretty much normal.

My rate is only 5.5/10 since it's closed-source wallet, but IMO there shouldn't be any problem advertising this wallet.

But this is the bit that concerns me:

OWNR WALLET is a private limited company based in Estonia.

Not sure what legal recourse one would have regarding a company based in Estonia?

I don't know either, but Ethonia openly legalize/support blockchain technology (i'm aware blockchain isn't equal blockchain).

[Pmalek]

I took a look at their ANN, there doesn't seem to be negative comments or members experiencing problems using the wallet. Not a lot of talk about the wallet on Bitcointalk outside of the mentioned ANN.

bob123 rightly questions the closed source nature of the wallet. Since nobody has been able to inspect the code nobody knows what is going on in the background and if proper security procedures have been followed.

The wallet being closed-source wouldn't be a reason for me to turn it down. Coinomi is closed-source and still has a big user base. What I don't like is the high fees that previous members have mentioned and the fact that they are relatively new + closed source. I'd rather hold back sending my coins to this wallet and see what happens in the future once they establish a positive reputation.   

[joniboini]

Looking past the "closed source" thing for a second... It's great that they're "licensed" and all:

To be honest this is not really exceptional. There are dozens of crypto projects a.k.a ICO projects that acquire a license from Estonia and got these 'acknowledgments'. I'd take this with a grain of salt due to its unreliability.

[Pmalek]

Yes, Estonia is a crypto-friendly country and if the service is registered in Estonia getting a license isn't a big issue. The main requirement is that stakeholders in the company don't have previous criminal records and all the needed documentation is complete. if all requirements are fulfilled it is possible to get a license in 2 weeks.

The entire process is explained here
https://e-resident.me/how-to-obtain-crypto-licenses-in-estonia/

[HCP]

As I suspected, it's pretty much just a "rubber stamp" exercise and doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things... seems somewhat akin to these websites that promote the fact they have SSL certificates to try and look more legit... not necessarily a bad thing that, in this case at least, they will have supposedly provided some information to authorities, but it doesn't actually provide much in the way of "protection" really.

Hopefully their fees/rates become a bit more reasonable... seems like both the margins and transaction fees are quite high.

[dkbit98]

I must say that I have not seen more stupid name for wallet than this - OWNR. What kind of bad branding is this?
KYC is probably mandatory and for sure it is not open source code.
I will skip it.

[OmegaStarScream]

I found this[1][2]. It appears that they have a partnership with Bitfinex which in my opinion is another indication for their legitimacy.

[1] https://www.bitfinex.com/posts/445
[2] https://medium.com/ownrwallet/ownr-wallet-partners-with-bitfinex-af078cec61ee

[hosemary]

KYC is probably mandatory and for sure it is not open source code.

Yes, KYC is mandatory
Here is what their website says about KYC.

For your order to be executed, you must upload the documents required by the KYC verification procedure within 48 business business hours since the order was created, and these documents must be in full compliance with our requirements.

[Dancing_Coin]

Hi. Just wanted to address as many questions as possible.

But this is the bit that concerns me:

OWNR WALLET is a private limited company based in Estonia.

Not sure what legal recourse one would have regarding a company based in Estonia?

Also, the wallet has a limited number of countries that they are able to conduct fiat->crypto transactions with: https://ownrwallet.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/44001816455

1. What's wrong with Estonia?   No, let me put it a bit different way which also answers the question about a limited number of countries: if you are based in Estonia, you can process payments for Europe and countries where there are no restrictions as to crypto-fiat operations. To process such operations in other countries like the USA, for instance, you've got to get a license in a particular country. Which takes time and efforts. So that's why currently only a limited number of countries for purchase is supported: we launched fiat-to-crypto exchange several months ago only.
Yet all the other options (send, receive, store, exchange) are available in any country but for high-risk countries we do not work with (mentioned in Terms).

Additionally, the fees seem quite excessive... and a little vague:

Transaction Fees
The User agrees to pay OWNR the Transaction fee for each completed order. The fee makes $7 per order, regardless of the amount. We may also charge some percent of the transaction amount, which varies depending on the region and asset price volatility.

2.This is for purchase with fiat only, correct And the fee may vary depending on the country indeed.

Noting of course that this for "fiat" transactions (not simply moving crypto in or out)

3.It's in Purchase crypto section.But I think we should put it clearer. For sending/receiving we don't charge any fees, you just pay a network fee.

[Dancing_Coin]

I have installed and it looks good and does what it says it does at least on the android version. Will it pull me away from my current multicoin wallet. Probably not, but that is because I have been using the old one for a while and I am used it.

I would have no issues doing a signature / wearing a signature for it.

You are going to get a lot of it's closed source don't use it comments.
With that being said, --> in my opinion<-- for trivial amounts it's not important closed vs open source for a mobile wallet.
I have gotten a lot of heat over time for saying this, and have started threads about it.

Would I store life altering amounts of crypto in it. No.
Would I store a nice vacation amounts of crypto in it. No.
Would I store enough crypto for a quick weekend away. Probably.

But that's my threshold, yours might be different.

So 8 out of 10 for doing it. 9.5 out of 10 if you feel you can ignore the closed source is evil people.

-Dave

Hi Dave. Thanks for sharing your thoughts here.

Although I understand that open source is generally more trusted than closed source in professional community, I can explain our position on this. This is not to convince someone or prove that closed source is good or better: everyone is free to decide, so it's just our vision

1. Generally, open source projects show the 'facade': they rarely show backend (if show it at all). At least our devs haven't seen any examples of an open source with backend.  This is quite explicable though taking into account competition in this industry, possible issues with intellectual property and so on.

2. We are not going to stay closed forever We are planning to share some code when we move closer to our vision of this wallet, with all the functionality we'd like to implement. But yes, only some code -- we will hardly break the system and show backend. I've mentioned why above.

[Dancing_Coin]

I must say that I have not seen more stupid name for wallet than this - OWNR. What kind of bad branding is this?
KYC is probably mandatory and for sure it is not open source code.
I will skip it.

KYC is mandatory for any entity selling crypto for fiat for amounts starting with $50. At least if this entity is legitimate.
It's not connected to open source / closed source.

[Dancing_Coin]

As I suspected, it's pretty much just a "rubber stamp" exercise and doesn't really mean much in the grand scheme of things... seems somewhat akin to these websites that promote the fact they have SSL certificates to try and look more legit... not necessarily a bad thing that, in this case at least, they will have supposedly provided some information to authorities, but it doesn't actually provide much in the way of "protection" really.

Hopefully their fees/rates become a bit more reasonable... seems like both the margins and transaction fees are quite high.

The website is targeted at a vast audience, not professional community. At least at this point, when we are working on basic functionality.
So mentioning SSL and licenses sounds clearer than writing we are a non-custodial wallet.

As for rates: we are still looking for a optimal business model and ways of making them lower.

[HCP]

Thanks for addressing some of the concerns and providing your reasoning for various business decisions. Like I said, I don't see the wallet being a scam as such... I just personally wouldn't choose to use it for the reasons I've already mentioned.

Best of luck with the wallet... it's a competitive space!


Also, one last thing, please don't multipost like that in future... it's against the rules. If you need to respond to multiple people/posts, you can actually quote multiple messages (just click the "quote" button on all the posts you want to reply to and it will add them to the reply textbox)... That way, you can respond to them all in one post and help keep things tidy.

[pooya87]

1. Generally, open source projects show the 'facade': they rarely show backend (if show it at all). At least our devs haven't seen any examples of an open source with backend.  This is quite explicable though taking into account competition in this industry, possible issues with intellectual property and so on.

then such project is not considered "open source" at all. and none of the popular bitcoin wallets do such a thing anyways. you can check them out yourself on github, they are 100% open source starting from their front-end to back-end and any kind of dependency that they use is also open source and could be found on another repository.
if you are worried about "intellectual property" you can always use a different license that could prevent people from copying your code without your permission.