Security flaws of this setup

[28e7166c23e70c2014feb5d64]

Consider a bitcoiner named Joe that has the following setup:

- Joe has a Linux machine.
- This machine is Joe's personal machine where he does everything, from watching movies to E-Banking.
- Joe is the only person that uses this machine, and no one else has access to it.
- Everything is run on his Linux user account `joe94`.
- `joe94` is sudoer.
- Joe installed Bitcoin Core and runs it with the default `bitcoin.conf`.
- Joe runs Electrs Electrum server.
- Joe has a Trezor hardware wallet.
- Joe uses the Trezor Suite app.
- Joe points the Trezor app to the local Electrum (instead of Trezor nodes).
- Joe follows all the "Trezor good practices" like storing his seed phrase only on physical media such as paper, checking the receiving address and sending address for every transaction, etc.
- Joe's computer is a laptop, so he can bring it anywhere and connect it to any random Wi-Fi network he finds on the go.

Would you consider Joe is at risk?

[LoyceV]

- Joe uses the Trezor Suite app.
- Joe points the Trezor app to the local Electrum (instead of Trezor nodes).

Why not use Electrum as a wallet instead of Trezor Suite?

Would you consider Joe is at risk?

At risk of what? Does Joe bring his Trezor hardware wallet with him?

- Joe runs Electrs Electrum server.
he can bring it anywhere and connect it to any random Wi-Fi network

I wouldn't run a server on public Wi-Fi. It just doesn't feel right.

[Amphenomenon]

Would you consider Joe is at risk?

This is pretty much risky. Connecting to random Wi-Fi is susceptible to man in the middle attacks.
Taking your pc around will increase the risks of it falling into hands of theft.
Using such pc to  run every activity online increase risks of malware.

While Joe coins are not directly at risks, his privacy and general security are.

[ABCbits]

- Joe has a Linux machine.
- This machine is Joe's personal machine where he does everything, from watching movies to E-Banking.

While malware designed for linux is rare, the risk is exist if watching movie involve pirated/cracked stuff.

- Joe's computer is a laptop, so he can bring it anywhere and connect it to any random Wi-Fi network he finds on the go.

Aside from MITM, evil twin attack (fake wifi hotspot with similar name with real one) can be risky if E-Banking is involved. Although using VPN you can trust supposed to solve this issue.

[suzanne5223]

Would you consider Joe is at risk?

Yes, I consider Joe to be at risk for using random/public WiFi networks because one of the strategies used by hackers to attack and also steal private data is to use public WiFi. Besides, some online thieves usually create their own public WiFi and disguise it as a genuine WiFi network.
There's no benefit in using public WiFi, and the price to pay is always a big one.

[LoyceV]

There's no benefit in using public WiFi

Not everyone has unlimited mobile data.

[suzanne5223]

There's no benefit in using public WiFi

Not everyone has unlimited mobile data.

You have a point, but if we think about the consequences and the level of how hacker use the man in the middle attack through the creation of fake Wi-Fi hotspots to read their target emails, steal personal information, and check the websites they are visiting, it is always better to always seek safety first, not some minutes of free public WiFi internet service.

[LoyceV]

You have a point, but if we think about the consequences and the level of how hacker use the man in the middle attack through the creation of fake Wi-Fi hotspots to read their target emails, steal personal information, and check the websites they are visiting, it is always better to always seek safety first, not some minutes of free public WiFi internet service.

That's what encryption is for: once my browser knows the security certificate for a website, no man in the middle can read the data.

[Amphenomenon]

You have a point, but if we think about the consequences and the level of how hacker use the man in the middle attack through the creation of fake Wi-Fi hotspots to read their target emails, steal personal information, and check the websites they are visiting, it is always better to always seek safety first, not some minutes of free public WiFi internet service.

That's what encryption is for: once my browser knows the security certificate for a website, no man in the middle can read the data.

Yes except from the evil twin attack, if the user is not using a VPN.

[Cricktor]

- Joe has a Linux machine.
...
- Joe's computer is a laptop, so he can bring it anywhere and connect it to any random Wi-Fi network he finds on the go.

Does this Linux laptop setup have a full disk encryption? I would recommend to use this for devices that are carried around and could easily be stolen.

I don't really like the random wifi networks usage but this can be mitigated.

It's imperative to carefully check certificates used in browsers to avoid MITM attacks.

Still not a big fan to use such a network "promiscuous" device for crypto wallets and e-banking.

- This machine is Joe's personal machine where he does everything, from watching movies to E-Banking.

I wouldn't want to use my daily driver for my crypto wallet stuff, but this depends strongly on what is done with the device and how security educated someone is and if the user does "risky" stuff on the internet. Some people install all the time some software they want to try out and whatnotelse. This could be a recipe for later desaster, especially when having all under one user account which is in the sudoers group. Priviledge escalation is only a step away...

Using a hardware wallet to secure private keys is good for Joe and mitigates a few problems that could arise with a daily driver device.