Thoughts about Passport hardware wallet

[dkbit98]

Nah, I don't want to earn off of a review or anything like that to be honest. It's not much money anyway and it can lead people to false conclusions. For example, I did criticize the v1 a good bit; if I end up really enjoying the v2 and hand out a referral code, someone could think I only changed opinion to refer many users and make a lot of money. So I would need to be conservative with any praises, even if I genuinely enjoy it, to make sure such a conclusion doesn't happen. This would bias me either way or another, so I prefer to stick to no referrals.

I am sure you will find some things that you don't like in all devices including Passport batch2, at least I can  
I am now reading Passport Ambassador program and I don't see anything wrong in giving anyone $10 discount while you would also get $10.
You are not forcing anyone to buy this wallet, and it's not like you will become rich doing this, but you never know  

Shipping isn't cheap. I started filling out the information with fake details until the costs were displayed. The fee to ship the device to an address in Zagreb, Croatia is $40. I got the same costs for an address in Germany and Serbia as well. I though that's the fee for sending it to Europe, so I tried South America but the exact same costs pop up for an Argentinian address, for example.  

I can confirm that, and it's not cheap but they are sending it from United States so I can understand.
Maybe they should open some shop in Europe or add some official resellers to reduce shipping cost, customs and deliver times.
I am not sure how much other hardware wallets charge for shipping directly from their official stores, but I can find those devices locally much easier.

UPDATE:
I found out there are three resellers from Europe, BTC Direct, Cryptomaan and Eventus sistemi from Slovenia (nearest location), but none of them is selling Passport Bathc2 yet.
https://foundationdevices.com/resellers/

[1714912875]

1714912875

[1714912875]

1714912875

[1714912875]

1714912875

[Pmalek]

UPDATE:
I found out there are three resellers from Europe, BTC Direct, Cryptomaan and Eventus sistemi from Slovenia (nearest location), but none of them is selling Passport Bathc2 yet.

BTC Direct and Cryptomaan are basically the same site. The first one is meant for the UK, and the second one is for customers from Belgium and the Netherlands. Notice the similarities in the design and layout of the two sites.

Another thing that caught my eye is the difference in price between BTC Direct/Cryptomaan and their Malaysia-based reseller Martview.
BTC Direct and Cryptomaan sell the HW for €329,95 each, while Martview has it listed for $299. Quite a significant difference when you think about it. Martview ships the devices from China, and the cheapest shipping costs to the EU are around €9. But you also have to take into account the import tax most probably.   

[RickDeckard]

Maybe they should open some shop in Europe or add some official resellers to reduce shipping cost, customs and deliver times.

For as much as I would love to see this, I guess that they still need to grow a bit more before venturing into Europe (and beyond). The good thing about the company - besides the open source product and all - is the fact that they are trying to have an organic grow rather than reaching for the stars only to fall short on the arrival - and this is mainly explained by the fact that they have very limited batch productions (1000 units of the first one and 2500 units on the second one). If this page is correct[1] they've already managed to fund a total of $2.8 million where $2.5 million came just from their second round of investments[2], and it actually got a bunch of investors interested, which is good! I assume they won't go into European markets even in version 3, but I'm really eager to see their strategic roadmap whenever they decide to announce it.

BTC Direct and Cryptomaan sell the HW for ?329,95 each, while Martview has it listed for $299.

At that price range - 329,95 € - it still makes sense to buy from those resellers, at least to my country, instead of risking importing the product and then having it stuck in a endless loops of custom procedures (and costs!). Simulating an order with dummy data on BTCDirect.eu I was being quoted a total price of 334,95 € for the first batch of devices. If I instead opted for ordering it from the United States - assuming shipping costs and taxes were the same for the first edition device - here's the comparison of "estimated" prices:

	Country	USA
Device value	267.32 €	271 €
Taxes	62.63 €	75 €
Shipping	5.00 €	36 €
Total	334.95 €	382 €

We're talking about a 50 € difference on a device that ends up costing almost 340 € so every bit of saving helps. As a final remark I would be really interested in trying out the product but at that price point its just unsustainable to me (at least for now). Glad that n0nce will eventually make a review of it!  
[1]https://angel.co/company/foundationdevices/funding
[2]https://foundationdevices.com/2021/06/announcing-our-seed-raise/

[dkbit98]

For as much as I would love to see this, I guess that they still need to grow a bit more before venturing into Europe (and beyond).

Yeah I know Foundation is still small company, but I don't want them to ever become so big ^(shit) like ledger
From what I heard, it looks like they do have plans for expanding and making more devices and models in future.

We're talking about a 50 € difference on a device that ends up costing almost 340 € so every bit of saving helps. As a final remark I would be really interested in trying out the product but at that price point its just unsustainable to me (at least for now). Glad that n0nce will eventually make a review of it!  

It is a big difference and saved money, but I am wondering what's going to happen with prices of batch2.
You never know what happens next, maybe n0nce becomes new official reseller for Europe
Maybe even Passport developers notice more activity and traffic coming from Bitcointalk forum and they send us few models for free testing and review.

[RickDeckard]

From what I heard, it looks like they do have plans for expanding and making more devices and models in future.

You heard it correctly I might say, he did stated that on this interview[1] - they believe that BTC adoption will hit a milestone this decade and mentioned the idea of making an open source phone for example and some "kind of node" (I gotta admit that he wasn't so clear on what kind of options they would develop on this front).

It is a big difference and saved money, but I am wondering what's going to happen with prices of batch2.

If we look at it, the EU stores are not selling the device that high (considering the base USA price). My expectation is that they are perhaps earning a bit less than 50 € as profit - which isn't something that huge considering the amount of work that they may be facing in importing the devices to their country. The base problem is the same when comparing a country outside USA and USA itself - the devices are just a tad too much expensive for the average bitcoin joe. It's a fact that these kind of devices aren't meant for them - especially the first few generations of Passport devices - but it does make it difficult for the company to expand without further investment rounds. As a side note, if anyone is interested in knowing more about Foundation as a company, I really advise you to hear the interview that I've posted. It gives an insight of the vision of Foundation CEO and how he sees the company going forward and where the development of BTC stands at the moment.

You never know what happens next, maybe n0nce becomes new official reseller for Europe
Maybe even Passport developers notice more activity and traffic coming from Bitcointalk forum and they send us few models for free testing and review.

Interesting, I though that n0nce was from USA. Then yeah, for sure we have a potential reseller, his review was better than some reviews I've seen on Youtube!

PS: Zack Herbert uses (and recommends) - or at least used during 2020 - Passport as a hardware wallet[2]!
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFLte6GbCys&t=1051s
[2]https://youtu.be/DFLte6GbCys?t=1643

[JL0]

Passport Batch 2 using Microchip 608a secure element and BitBox02 ATECC608B?

Does Passport have a "dual chip" security concept like BitBox02 too?

https://shiftcrypto.ch/bitbox02/security-features/

[dkbit98]

Passport Batch 2 using Microchip 608a secure element and BitBox02 ATECC608B?

Does Passport have a "dual chip" security concept like BitBox02 too?

Passport batch 2 hardware wallet is using same chips like previous batch_one device, that is ATECC608A + STM32H753.
STM32 is general purpose microchip, ATECC608A is secure element used for storing seed phrases, and ATECC608B secure element is just improved version with security fixes.
As far as I know only BitBox02 hardware wallet is using B version of that secure element in combination with microchip ATSAMD51J20A.
To conclude, both hardware wallets are using dual-chip security concept, like most other hardware wallets available today that use secure elements.

[JL0]

Passport Batch 2 using Microchip 608a secure element and BitBox02 ATECC608B?

Does Passport have a "dual chip" security concept like BitBox02 too?

Passport batch 2 hardware wallet is using same chips like previous batch_one device, that is ATECC608A + STM32H753.
STM32 is general purpose microchip, ATECC608A is secure element used for storing seed phrases, and ATECC608B secure element is just improved version with security fixes.
As far as I know only BitBox02 hardware wallet is using B version of that secure element in combination with microchip ATSAMD51J20A.
To conclude, both hardware wallets are using dual-chip security concept, like most other hardware wallets available today that use secure elements.

Thanks for your answer.

The BitBox02 security architecture is designed towards these goals. We use two chips, a general purpose MCU and a secure chip in parallel, both with their unique strengths. Instead of running Bitcoin firmware directly on the secure chip, we run it on the MCU, meaning the code is fully open-source and auditable by anyone. Secrets are also stored on the MCU, but encrypted using multiple keys, including a key stored on the secure chip that can only be accessed using dedicated key derivation functions (KDF).

Compared to only using an MCU, this setup provides additional security features:

Reading the encrypted data directly from the MCU is useless in itself
Enforcing a delay during each unlock attempt to slow down brute-force attacks
Limiting the maximum number of unlock attempts over the whole lifespan
A true random number generator (RNG), without the need to trust it
Secure storage of a unique attestation keys to ensure only officially signed firmware can be used

Again, we don’t want to trust the secure chip. This is why our security architecture makes sure that the secure chip can never learn any cryptocurrency-related secrets. In the unlikely case that the secure chip is compromised and behaves maliciously, the overall security degrades to the security level of not using a secure chip in the first place, still securing your secrets using the user password and the MCU key.

However, BitBox02 does not trust the secure element and therefore does not store any important information there, such as the seed. So far I only know the BitBox that has such a method. For example, the ledger stores the seed in the secure element.
Maybe I expressed myself wrong or maybe I didn't understand it correctly.

[dkbit98]

However, BitBox02 does not trust the secure element and therefore does not store any important information there, such as the seed. So far I only know the BitBox that has such a method. For example, the ledger stores the seed in the secure element.
Maybe I expressed myself wrong or maybe I didn't understand it correctly.

Ah I see now what you wanted to say, they are using different method by encrypting seed words on main microprocessor and they use secure element for key derivation and for random number generator.
Some people would argue that this is inferior model compared to other hardware wallets, because RNG number generator is not really random and if encryption is broken seed words can be easier broken on main processor.
I would much ratter generate my own seed words offline using dices and then import them in Bitbox02 wallet, instead of thrusting some chip to do it for me.

[JL0]

However, BitBox02 does not trust the secure element and therefore does not store any important information there, such as the seed. So far I only know the BitBox that has such a method. For example, the ledger stores the seed in the secure element.
Maybe I expressed myself wrong or maybe I didn't understand it correctly.

Ah I see now what you wanted to say, they are using different method by encrypting seed words on main microprocessor and they use secure element for key derivation and for random number generator.
Some people would argue that this is inferior model compared to other hardware wallets, because RNG number generator is not really random and if encryption is broken seed words can be easier broken on main processor.
I would much ratter generate my own seed words offline using dices and then import them in Bitbox02 wallet, instead of thrusting some chip to do it for me.

Many thanks for your response.

What can you say about this criticism regarding air-gapped hardware wallet?. I'd appreciate it if you could say something about that.

The seed can, for example, be extracted bit-by-bit via SD card (separate file, additional data in the PSBT or as an entry in FAT 1. A true Airgap system should also not read SD cards that were in an online computer. The communication between the hardware wallet and the computer is a bit slower, but not more secure.

This is also possible using QR codes. If you check the content of each QR code with a separate device, a lot can be ruled out, but subtle possibilities are also conceivable. If certain HWW now advertise with “encrypted QR codes”, the code naturally loses all transparency.
The seed can potentially even be hidden in the bitcoin transactions themselves. The BitBox02 is the first hardware wallet that protects against this "nonce covered channel attack 9.

The fact that the BitBox02 is primarily made of plastic (and has no glass cover, for example) is a security feature. It is bonded internally with military grade epoxy and will be destroyed upon opening.

We publish all hardware schematics 4 (including Bill of Material 2) and an x-ray 13 of the BitBox02. If you want to check your BitBox02 yourself, you can have it x-rayed by a dentist and check that there are no additional chips inside.

Only signed firmware runs on the BitBox: several developers must sign the firmware, otherwise it will not run on the BitBox. We independently compile the release and compare the firmware checksum.

[dkbit98]

What can you say about this criticism regarding air-gapped hardware wallet?. I'd appreciate it if you could say something about that.

I saw what Bitbox wrote about air-gapped hardware wallet and it looks like a lame explanation to me.
Just because they don't use this model doesn't mean this is bad, and they didn't really invent warm water with using Trezor code and adding secure element.
I could find many things that I don't like with their USB based device, like touch screen buttons, bad screen, etc.
For me air-gapped devices with QR codes are far superior compared to standard USB signing devices.

New real life images and videos are posted for Passport bath2 device from Bitcoin 2022 Miami Conference, and I have to say that screen is much better, and device overall looks great.
I would personally prefer to have all black color both front and back, but I think Foundation will release some protection skins or cases that can be replaced easily.
One thing I hope is they removed extra junk code and made it only as optional install.


https://twitter.com/Marketsbylili/status/1511833505600315396

[SFR10]

but I think Foundation will release some protection skins or cases that can be replaced easily.
~Snipped~
https://i.ibb.co/S7q5T14/img295c9ea9958b4350bca47858df0fc584.gif
https://twitter.com/Marketsbylili/status/1511833505600315396

I hope they do, especially for the back cover ^{[judging by how light reflects its surface, it seems slippery to me and it's not just because of the textured design (it's a bit "more noticeable on this" one)]}.
^{- AFAICR, that wasn't the case with the previous version.}

One thing I hope is they removed extra junk code and made it only as optional install.

Same here ^{[assuming that you're referring to the secret menu/hidden games]}.

[JL0]

Have any of you pre-ordered the Batch 2 model? Maybe @n0nce? Found your review really great and detailed.

[n0nce]

Have any of you pre-ordered the Batch 2 model? Maybe @n0nce? Found your review really great and detailed.

Yeah, I did, beginning of 2022, nothing arrived so far. I believe it was pushed back once or twice. Hopefully it comes in April.
Thanks for your feedback; similar stuff with comparison to v1 is definitely planned!

This time I'll probably also leverage the fact of owning 2 of these to experiment and review the multisig feature. Apparently some wallets that advertise it, don't deliver, but from what I've seen, Passport handles it nicely. Don't trust, verify, though!

[RickDeckard]

Have any of you pre-ordered the Batch 2 model? Maybe @n0nce? Found your review really great and detailed.

Yeah, I did, beginning of 2022, nothing arrived so far. I believe it was pushed back once or twice. Hopefully it comes in April.
Thanks for your feedback; similar stuff with comparison to v1 is definitely planned!

Sorry for being the one to break it to you n0nce, but it seems like it will pushed back further than April according to the recent tweets made by the official Twitter account[1]:

Shipping Update‼️

Thank you to everyone who preordered a Passport Wallet! Unfortunately, due to supply chain constraints production has been delayed.

Delays relate to:
-Casted metal used in the device.
-Packaging materials made in Shanghai.

(...)

Estimated delay in production: 3-5 weeks

If China does not mandate additional lockdowns, shipping is expected to begin within 1-2 weeks after production is complete.

If you go over to their twitter thread you'll see that the reasons for delaying are mostly related to sourcing their materials (both related to the wallet and packaging) - this is also aggravated by the zero-Covid strategy on China[2]. I estimate that if everything runs smoothly they may be able to start shipping early/mid June...
[1]https://nitter.net/FOUNDATIONdvcs/status/1515055087705595915
[2]https://www.bbc.com/news/59882774

[n0nce]

Have any of you pre-ordered the Batch 2 model? Maybe @n0nce? Found your review really great and detailed.

Yeah, I did, beginning of 2022, nothing arrived so far. I believe it was pushed back once or twice. Hopefully it comes in April.
Thanks for your feedback; similar stuff with comparison to v1 is definitely planned!

Sorry for being the one to break it to you n0nce, but it seems like it will pushed back further than April according to the recent tweets

Oh, that's unfortunate, but thanks for making me aware of it.. I'm a bit surprised that they didn't anticipate more lockdowns and global supply issues and chose to give a highly optimistic ETA of February. Honestly, better give a later ETA and maybe ship earlier than expected instead of the other way round.

Foundation Devices is only making their second product, so I can somehow excuse the fact they went with preorders again. But I must say, as the space progresses, this practice can quickly get you into a sort of loop, where you announce a product and it seems revolutionary and unique, but in the time you spend developing and making it, the competition might surpass you and you end up shipping a product that is at or below 'status quo'.

Honestly, I don't yet see much competition for the Passport lineup, but if you need over half a year to ship a product, out of which 4 months are 'unexpected delay', you better make sure this 'expectation vs reality gap' closes fast, before it bites you in the ass (by shipping 'old' feeling products due to too long lead times).

[dkbit98]

Oh, that's unfortunate, but thanks for making me aware of it.. I'm a bit surprised that they didn't anticipate more lockdowns and global supply issues and chose to give a highly optimistic ETA of February. Honestly, better give a later ETA and maybe ship earlier than expected instead of the other way round.

I could expect to see microchip shortage... but now we are starting to see metal cast and packaging material shortages, and from information I have from China, this is going super crazy levels, not going to end any time soon.
Main ports are closed in Shanghai and people are literally jumping out from their windows and committing suicides, because they don't have anything to eat and they are not allowed to go out.

Solution for Passport problem would be to decentralize more and make reserve options for most parts, when that is possible, and I am sure other countries can make some parts.
I see now that Passport is going to make packaging in United States, but in 2022 you need to have backup options for everything, and avoid single point of failure as much as possible.

[RickDeckard]

Just a quick update - May 20th - regarding Batch 2 : Foundation estimates that they'll start assembly the first units in the first week of June[1]! Here's a more detailed information regarding materials availability and next steps:

FOUNDATION @FOUNDATIONdvcs

-We’ve approved mass production for all parts
-Circuit boards are currently in assembly at our USA facility
-Packing has shipped and is expected to arrive next week
-Plastic components will arrive next week

It seems that my early estimates weren't all that bad... Looking forward for your review n0nce!
[1]https://nitter.net/FOUNDATIONdvcs/status/1527797590263226372

[n0nce]

It seems that my early estimates weren't all that bad... Looking forward for your review n0nce!

Thanks Rick for keeping us up to date! I think I've said it before, but I'm not happy with how they set their ETAs. It's already been like this with v1 and it hasn't improved on v2. They always set completely unrealistic ETAs and then have to push them back repeatedly. Why not just set a worst-case one and then maybe surprise customers with earlier delivery? Instead they've basically been saying 'delivery next month' since January. I'll get more into this with sources and whatnot in the review, though. This communication from them is really something I don't like.

[DireWolfM14]

It seems that my early estimates weren't all that bad... Looking forward for your review n0nce!

Thanks Rick for keeping us up to date! I think I've said it before, but I'm not happy with how they set their ETAs. It's already been like this with v1 and it hasn't improved on v2. They always set completely unrealistic ETAs and then have to push them back repeatedly. Why not just set a worst-case one and then maybe surprise customers with earlier delivery? Instead they've basically been saying 'delivery next month' since January. I'll get more into this with sources and whatnot in the review, though. This communication from them is really something I don't like.

I can't imagine it's helping their business in general.  I for one would have bought a mk3 if they had only announced the mk4 as "coming soon," but since they were taking reservations months ago I decided to wait. I imagine I'm not the only one.  The silly thing is I probably would have bought a mk4 eventually also.

ETA: 10% off for Pizza day?  To hell with the wait, I placed the order.