ㅤ

[Symmetrick]

ㅤ

[1715434112]

1715434112

[1715434112]

1715434112

[1715434112]

1715434112

[Charles-Tim]

But people should not forget that Metamask is a web wallet, online wallets are more vulnerable to online attackers, but among online wallets, web wallets are most vulnerable to attacks. I will still advice people to have their own individual wallet which is is open source, reputed and not web wallet. It is still better to go for Electrum wallet. And for holding large amount of coins hardware wallet would be better. Even Electrum can be used on airgapped device as a cold storage, it can also be an extension to some hardware wallets like Trezor and Ledger Nano, someone can decide to run his own Electrum server for privacy.

For privacy: Bitcoin Core
Best bitcoin SPV wallet: Electrum
Best hardware wallet: Open source hardware wallet

[Coin_trader]

This is a good initiative for implementing Bitcoin wallet into Web3. Ofc there’s always a risk on using web3 wallet compared to a non-custodial wallet but the convenience of the web3 wallet is very helpful as it can give ease on transaction via website without minimizing your browser. I will definitely use it to store my spare Bitcoin as I’m using metamask for all my altcoins for a long time without any problem encountered.  

[zasad@]

MetaMask is the ideal wallet for working with DeFi projects and decentralized exchanges, complete with hardware wallets. But for storing bitcoin, it is better to use time-tested wallets.
Metamask still lacks its own hardware wallet.

[sunsilk]

A welcoming development.

I guess metamask has already seen that they can maximize their users by having the support of having bitcoin as well. Still, no doubt with their niche and focus, they've been very well at it.

But with this new development and feature that they'll have. It's going to go through a lot of criticisms first but with the innovation that the whole crypto market goes on, everything have to adopt and upgrade.

[mk4]

I have some security concern with browser extension wallet, but i hope it'll push some people to use non-custodial wallet instead. But looking at GitHub page, looks like it'll take some time before it's available for regular user.

It's technically non-custodial though? Just not as secure as your typical non-custodial wallet like Electrum because this is a browser extension.

They should support hardware wallets though, because they do with Ethereum and other EVM chains.

[buwaytress]

Very interesting. I still use MM almost on an entirely different level, it doesn't go near my Bitcoin, but I definitely could see some usefulness some time down the line especially as some services I use are already migrating to (d)apps. Does open yet another vulnerability for the typical user though.

Snaps is the one I've never heard of before. Anyone used?

They should support hardware wallets though, because they do with Ethereum and other EVM chains.

Ledger at least I know.

[rhomelmabini]

Still having doubts about the decentralization issue over Metamask & Infura concerning the recent blocking of wallets among Venezuelan and Iranian users. And, one interesting thing is that there's an issue as well relating to both (Metamask & Infura) and that it needs a court review regarding the transfer of control to JP Morgan. They may have an explanation, but I still doubt until the audit is done.

[cheezcarls]

As much as I liked Metamask, it's a web wallet that is so vulnerable to phishing sites, hacks, etc. Although that it's a welcoming development for Metamask to include Bitcoin in their system, their security is still a major concern that left a lot of users getting hacked or their funds stolen from the methods of the smart hackers out there.

[verita1]

This is good news given the user demand for Metamask.
Web3 is closer to our daily needs, often to learn about a new product it is necessary to connect with a Wallet and there is MetaMask to be able to interact.
Of course everything will depend on the network that supports the site.
I am also a MetaMask user and interact with several networks for its comfort, security and versatility.
Now with bitcoin I would have to study very well how it works and test it.
This development indicates that bitcoin will be used more frequently in these times to come.

[Cryptomiles1]

We or user don't have to be over emphasized or overwhelmed with it and security measures have to be taken place know that it's a web wallet, Let us be conscious of it. Though this is very cool anyway.

[hd49728]

I would like to use a wallet that is non custodial and on my computer only. Metamask is an extension and even it is non custodial, I feel it is less safer than non browser wallets like Bitcoin Core, Electrum, Wasabi. Of course, in the end, people have to keep their private keys or seeds safely.

This news, this adoption of MetaMask, their intention to join the party, expanding from ERC20 tokens to Bitcoin is very great for their income as well as for Bitcoin community. Anyway, let's use it with careful thinking and remember with whatever wallet, don't store all your coins in one wallet.

[mk4]

Still having doubts about the decentralization issue over Metamask & Infura concerning the recent blocking of wallets among Venezuelan and Iranian users. And, one interesting thing is that there's an issue as well relating to both (Metamask & Infura) and that it needs a court review regarding the transfer of control to JP Morgan. They may have an explanation, but I still doubt until the audit is done.

Even though we haven't had such incident yet with Bitcoin(as far as I know, besides the recent Wasabi Wallet thing) — if you really want to be as ungovernable as possible, you should also be running(and connecting to) your own full node for your Bitcoin wallets.

[The Cryptovator]

Still, I am a fan of hardware wallets though sometimes use Metamask for the token or use swap. It's quite easy to connect Metamask there. No doubt it's good if they start to support Bitcoin as well. For those who have been using Metamask, it will be better for them. For mobile devices, there are apps for Metamask which is better than extension. But still, I will prefer to use a hardware wallet to secure your funds. Don't depend on a browser extension to secure and store your funds.

[_BlackStar]

Although so far I've never used a wallet extension like metamask in any browser, but I think it's a development that fans are hoping for. I'm still pretty safe using electrum because actually web wallet are a bit risky from online attacks, especially phishing. So it takes extra consideration when we want to use such a wallet to store bitcoin.

[Xal0lex]

The non-custodial wallet MetaMask, known more to fans of ETH and ERC-20 tokens, will add support for bitcoin in a Web3 application. They tweeted about it:

It would be nice if the wallet, when bitcoin support will be integrated, could immediately convert BTC to WBTC, to interact bitcoin with Ethereum blockchain, or at least change immediately in the wallet. Such an action would greatly simplify interaction with DeFi, farming, lending, borrowing, and other crypto activities. It would be a universal wallet, especially when paired with a hardware wallet.

[SFR10]

I will definitely use it to store my spare Bitcoin as I’m using metamask for all my altcoins for a long time without any problem encountered.  

It's worth noting that it's still not available in the main MetaMask app, so you have to use MetaMask Flask instead ^{[in other words, it could have some bugs]}!

They should support hardware wallets though, because they do with Ethereum and other EVM chains.

Ledger at least I know.

And a few more:

• MetaMask currently supports five lines of hardware wallet: AirGap Vault, Keystone, Lattice, Ledger and Trezor. These wallets are supported on Extension, and will be able to be added to Mobile in future updates.

Still having doubts about the decentralization issue over Metamask & Infura concerning the recent blocking of wallets among Venezuelan and Iranian users.

If the issue with MM is the fact that they're using "Infura nodes by default", then there's still a way for affected users to use MM by "connecting it to their own node".

[hatshepsut93]

This is bad, we should be discouraging people from using any hot wallets for non-trivial amounts, but now there's a risk that lots of ETH fans would pick Metamask as their wallet of choice when they will deal with Bitcoin. Airgapped computer or a hardware wallet should be the default option for any beginner, it's critical that people begin their Bitcoin journey with good habits and will save them from catastrophic failures in the long run.

[lovesmayfamilis]

With the advent of an extension that also added bitcoin, it will certainly inspire hackers to create a fake extension, as appetites will increase.
In general, I do not trust all the extensions that inexperienced users usually hang like a Christmas tree, and even more so extensions that are related to finance.
In addition, many extensions take away the privacy of users, as they collect information on all possible browser fingerprints.

[GreatArkansas]

More convenient for me especially most of the time when I am doing bitcoin transactions I am on my browser.
The only downside here is some phishing websites because this is what is common happening right now on Metamask, especially if a website platform have permission on your extension but I believe Metamask got some feature to avoid these, prone to hackers.
I hope there will be a lot of options especially import/export keys or to other wallets.