Multi-sig is the future of enhanced security

[Kalchef]

So crypto wallet hacks would have reduced a lot if everyone is using multi-sig wallets rather.

Even if you click on malicious links only part of the seed or key will be leaked and that makes it useless.

If your key is lost the funds can still be recovered as long as the remaining keys is available.

To authorise a transaction multiple private keys are needed.

Funds remain secured even if one key is compromised?

Then why isn't everyone using this instead of single signature wallets.?

[BlackBoss_]

So crypto wallet hacks would have reduced a lot if everyone is using multi-sig wallets rather.

Then why isn't everyone using this instead of single signature wallets.?

Multisig wallets are only safer and more secure than single signature wallets if people use it properly and keep co-signer wallets secure and safe.

If they treat each cosigner wallet carelessly as same as how they use a single signature wallet, a multisig wallet can not help increasing safety and security of their Bitcoin fund too much.

Bybit hack and Gnosis safe wallet compromised.

[Zaguru12]

Funds remain secured even if one key is compromised?

Then why isn't everyone using this instead of single signature wallets.?

Yes you’re right there is less risk of hack due to multi seeds you need to have access to the required number of keys or seed neede to actually co-sign the transaction, but there are multi sig set ups also which with one seed phrase you have full access to co-sign the transaction example is if that seed phrase actually generates the required number of co-signers like the 2FA setup on electrum wallet and which is a 2 of 3 multi sig wallet with the seed phrase controlling two of the master private keys, so in setups like this the hacker gets access to this seed phrase he will be able to withdraw funds on this wallet.

So yes multi sig is less risky but doesn’t totally eliminate the risk because I read about bybit wallet that was hacked was even multi sig and the hacker tricked them into signing a transaction through phishing, so even with multi sig one still needs to protect themselves

The reason why everyone isn’t using the wallet is simply because they need to have two or more separate devices for each seed phrase or co-signer because using one device for two co-signing seed phrases then tyere will be a single point of failure as such you need to have multiple devices or hardware wallets before you use a multi sig wallet

[Charles-Tim]

If they treat each cosigner wallet carelessly as same as how they use a single signature wallet, a multisig wallet can not help increasing safety and security of their Bitcoin fund too much.

No matter what, multisig wallet are safer than single signature wallet, but you are not wrong. To compromise just a private key is easier than to compromise more than one private key.

Some people can use a cold wallet and also have like 2 or 3 of it to set up a multisig wallet.

Another one are people that make use of both hot and cold wallets to setup a multisig wallet.

[FirmWars]

Then why isn't everyone using this instead of single signature wallets.?

Everyone is not using it because of their personal reasons 🤷‍♀️ but the most common reason that comes to mind if you are wondering why everyone is not using multi signature wallets is because of how complex it is to set it up, people wants simple something that they can do sharply with good speed, another one is that the complexity of this multi signature reduces convince and most users doesn't want that inconvenience of waiting for every message to be signed before they can perform transaction. Another reason is that most Bitcoin holders consider the small amount of Bitcoin they are holding which they think is not big enough to go for multi signature wallet. The last reason is about cost of the transaction fees. Most people just want what is simple but you are right that multi signature add more security to our asset if we adopt it.

[NurseHub]

Just know that it's difficult for lazy world to take accountability of the security and handle double activities just to make transactions. in today's world some people want to even leave the security or the safety of there coins in the hands of a co-operation so that they can't be blamed for whatever happens this kind of thinking in my opinion has left a lot of people not to think of multi signature as the solution to their wallets safety.
You're right if people start considering it as what it is the better safety of our funds will be.

[xbetz.io]

Multisig is safer in theory but not necessarily in practice for most users. The real barrier isn’t security, it’s operational complexity. Managing backups, cosigners, recovery paths and human error introduces new failure modes.

For individuals, a poorly implemented multisig can be riskier than a well-secured single-sig. Multisig shines when procedures, redundancy and responsibility are clearly defined, which is why institutions use it far more than individuals.

[Cookdata]

Everyone is not using it because of their personal reasons 🤷‍♀️ but the most common reason that comes to mind if you are wondering why everyone is not using multi signature wallets is because of how complex it is to set it up, people wants simple something that they can do sharply with good speed, another one is that the complexity of this multi signature reduces convince and most users doesn't want that inconvenience of waiting for every message to be signed before they can perform transaction. Another reason is that most Bitcoin holders consider the small amount of Bitcoin they are holding which they think is not big enough to go for multi signature wallet. The last reason is about cost of the transaction fees. Most people just want what is simple but you are right that multi signature add more security to our asset if we adopt it.

There is absolutely nothing that justify complexity over security. Check very well, people that complain about wallet hack and drained, they are mostly people that prioritize hot wallet over cold storage to store keys with large sum of Bitcoin. If you are going to hold a very substantial amount of money, you shouldn't be complaining about wallet complexity because safety comes before anything, nothing good comes simple by design and that's what Multisig is about.

From my own preference, people use single private keys from seed phrase because it's easy to handle to the best to avoid single point of failure, just back up and hide it from people and keep it in a location that is far from the internet, traditionally that's what many people do. Even wallets on hot storage do the same, avoid malware as possible, avoid things that could compromised their storage, these is basically what they do to avoid wallet compromise but more better when it's done in an airgap device.

[coinlary]

Even if you click on malicious links only part of the seed or key will be leaked and that makes it useless.

If done right, yes, but then we have some people who would actually use themselves as cosigners and still save those keys in the same medium that could compromise all of them at the same time. Very possible.

Another possibility is using a compromised device as hot wallet for all signings. All they have to do is not spoof you while they quietly export just two or all three keys when you use them. Possible, but for that to happen, you must have been so bad at OPSEC.
Not possible with a hardware wallet, though. But then the malware can still change the address that would be signed by the cosigners, which will result in the same thing: "theft."

Then why isn't everyone using this instead of single signature wallets.?

Because it could be stressful to some, while some  might just be too lazy to set it up because it requires some knowledge. For others, they don't need it because they can use other safe methods.

Well, you could just have cold storage with a passphrase. That is safe enough for a personal fund, but there's no problem with having a multisig wallet either. Making it cold adds more security too, depending on how the signing is handled.

[EL MOHA]

For individuals, a poorly implemented multisig can be riskier than a well-secured single-sig. Multisig shines when procedures, redundancy and responsibility are clearly defined, which is why institutions use it far more than individuals.

This isn’t about multi sig wallet alone but also about all wallets once the implementation is poor it makes the wallet to be vulnerable to hackers, for me even individual users usually do not prefer multi sig wallet because let’s take a look at the devices required to have it set up it, one might have to need multiple device each for individual seed phrase or signer for the proper set up and that extra funds. Also the back up of this multi sig if a user is to handle it alone can actually be redundancy

[Obim34]

Everyone is not using it because of their personal reasons 🤷‍♀️ but the most common reason that comes to mind if you are wondering why everyone is not using multi signature wallets is because of how complex it is to set it up, people wants simple something that they can do sharply with good speed, another one is that the complexity of this multi signature reduces convince and most users doesn't want that inconvenience of waiting for every message to be signed before they can perform transaction.

You are misunderstanding some stuffs concerning multisig wallets. There is no or very little complexity in setting up a multisig wallet, just few minutes is enough to set it up, without any technical stress. Besides, why can't you take extra time to maximize your own wallet security, what's there to run the set up using less than 10 minutes of your time?

Another reason is that most Bitcoin holders consider the small amount of Bitcoin they are holding which they think is not big enough to go for multi signature wallet. The last reason is about cost of the transaction fees. Most people just want what is simple but you are right that multi signature add more security to our asset if we adopt it.

You don't need to spend money on hardware wallet to set up a multisig wallet, it's available on software wallets, like Electrum.

[alani123]

To use multi Sig is one thing. To do it correctly is another.


For instance if you put a single custodian in charge of a hundred people's bitcoin's, would you want to let a single worker have access to withdrawing it all? No. Multi Sig in that case is mandated and in fact many exchanges use it.

As of individual users, I don't see the use case that much.

[Cryptomultiplier]

So crypto wallet hacks would have reduced a lot if everyone is using multi-sig wallets rather.

Even if you click on malicious links only part of the seed or key will be leaked and that makes it useless.

If your key is lost the funds can still be recovered as long as the remaining keys is available.

To authorise a transaction multiple private keys are needed.

Funds remain secured even if one key is compromised?

Then why isn't everyone using this instead of single signature wallets.?

Multi- sig might be a brilliant way to make sure that funds in your wallet is safer than using a single signature wallet, but let's not overule or downplay the part that personal choice has to play in that decision.
Some may use the one they have long understood and well, haven't had an issue with while using it, so why change?

It is only those who are new to the cryptocurrency space that most of the times have that much fear for the safety of their holdings, because of all they have read and that may still be possible to happen again, and they jump unto using multi-sig.
 It is paramount to do your research properly so as to know the best approach to secure your holdings, because the knowledge is very important and the importance of not losing your seed phrase is a burden that may still be carried around even while using the multi-sig approach for enhanced security.

[dkbit98]

Multisig exist for a long time, so it can't be future, and I doubt this would ever be accepted by most people.
When keys are exposed you lose your coins, both in singlesig and in multisig setup, unless exposure is only partial.
You need to have keys located in different locations, and that is mostly used by companies or people who can handle more complicated setup.
I would never recommend multisig setup to any newbies.

[SilverCryptoBullet]

Multisig exist for a long time, so it can't be future, and I doubt this would ever be accepted by most people.
When keys are exposed you lose your coins, both in singlesig and in multisig setup, unless exposure is only partial.
You need to have keys located in different locations, and that is mostly used by companies or people who can handle more complicated setup.
I would never recommend multisig setup to any newbies.

Multisig wallet is harder to set up and to use while there is more expensive transaction fee and there is more space for mistake in setup, backup and practice with a multisig wallet. I agree with you that this wallet type is only recommended for people who already have enough experience with non-custodial wallets. They must start and master single signature wallet before trying to explore and use multisig wallets.

[LIST] Multisig wallets.[url]

[Satofan44]

Consider this. A single person is unable to hold 1 set of keys responsibly and only deal with them in the correct matter. What makes you think that a situation that involves several people dealing with a more complicated concept and more keys will result always in better outcomes? If you knew how often people make major mistakes in groups, in everything from technology to hospitals you would be afraid of most of the world. Multisignature stuff is mishandled all the time, but it just happens to occur at times when the person or people involved at not compromised. Therefore, often the mistake can silently be corrected without a loss of funds. Before someone jumps with a dumb rebuttal, many people copy their seed phrase somewhere by mistake and they don't get hacked in that particular moment too.

We have confirmation bias, we only see the cases where a hack or loss of funds does happen. We do not see the big dark number of the cases where keys were mishandled and nothing happened. It happens a lot more than you think.

Multisig exist for a long time, so it can't be future, and I doubt this would ever be accepted by most people.

This just proves that most people are stupid, and you are one of those stupid people.  Multisig all the way, it needs to be standardized across all hardware wallets and all wallets should have a dedicated UI tab for this. That is the future of security for the average people, 3 different hardware devices in a 2 out of 3 setup with a very nice UX.

Multisig wallet is harder to set up and to use while there is more expensive transaction fee and there is more space for mistake in setup, backup and practice with a multisig wallet. I agree with you that this wallet type is only recommended for people who already have enough experience with non-custodial wallets. They must start and master single signature wallet before trying to explore and use multisig wallets.

While you are correct that one must pay more in fees, that point does not hold. Most average people do not make a significant amount of transactions for this to matter that much, especially when we are in long periods of low fees. The added security is worth the cost, it is extremely cheap for what you get in terms of security.

[FirmWars]

Everyone is not using it because of their personal reasons 🤷‍♀️ but the most common reason that comes to mind if you are wondering why everyone is not using multi signature wallets is because of how complex it is to set it up, people wants simple something that they can do sharply with good speed, another one is that the complexity of this multi signature reduces convince and most users doesn't want that inconvenience of waiting for every message to be signed before they can perform transaction. Another reason is that most Bitcoin holders consider the small amount of Bitcoin they are holding which they think is not big enough to go for multi signature wallet. The last reason is about cost of the transaction fees. Most people just want what is simple but you are right that multi signature add more security to our asset if we adopt it.

There is absolutely nothing that justify complexity over security. Check very well, people that complain about wallet hack and drained, they are mostly people that prioritize hot wallet over cold storage to store keys with large sum of Bitcoin. If you are going to hold a very substantial amount of money, you shouldn't be complaining about wallet complexity because safety comes before anything, nothing good comes simple by design and that's what Multisig is about.

From my own preference, people use single private keys from seed phrase because it's easy to handle to the best to avoid single point of failure, just back up and hide it from people and keep it in a location that is far from the internet, traditionally that's what many people do. Even wallets on hot storage do the same, avoid malware as possible, avoid things that could compromised their storage, these is basically what they do to avoid wallet compromise but more better when it's done in an airgap device.

The first paragraph you wrote is mostly true, complexity should not be used to justify high level security, but then, what you said on the second paragraph, confirms what I'm still saying, people want what's just simple. They just want to create an address then back up the keys or seed phrase offline and believe that it's safe there and when they want to make transaction, they want just something swift which  is just the one time signature from their end. Everyone just have preference of what they want, you can check around in your neighborhood to know how many people are actually using multistage wallets, ask them why are they not using it.

[Kiddo15]

I think if the need to use Multi-sig wallet arises, then you see people using it, but most individuals just want to use a single key wallet, most times for convenience, but I believe if what is in the portfolio is huge, then there is need to use a Multi-sig wallet, as it's secured and reduces compromise. I believe a lot of people are using it, it's something people do in private, you don't expect them to start announcing it though.

[Sammye3]

Multi-sig wallets are very secure with stronger security system and difficult access to hack or breach assets as it is required you would need more than one private key to make any transaction. As secure as it could be, it always has disadvantages that could hinder the easy flow of transaction as all parties involved would need to give approval before any transaction is made.

In a case of emergency, it could be very frustrating and in the worst case scenario, when two out of three private key is lost, it is possible that the wallet could be locked permanently and all assets become inaccessible. Multi-sig wallet is mostly used for joint wallets for business and group purposes and it's not required for day-to-day transactions as it would be stressful to coordinate.

[SeriouslyGiveaway]

As secure as it could be, it always has disadvantages that could hinder the easy flow of transaction as all parties involved would need to give approval before any transaction is made.

It's a little bit inaccurate as with a multisig wallet, there are cosigners and there is a number of cosigners need to sign a transaction to broadcast it to Bitcoin mempools. This means not all co-signers have to sign one transaction from a multisig wallet.

Your information is only accurate if you set up a wallet like 2-2 cosigners, for example, that require all cosigners have to sign a transaction.
Multisig wallets.
A multisig wallet is a M of N (cosigners) multisig wallet, and if M = N, your saying is true, while if M > N, your saying turns to inaccurate.
How to setup and use Electrum MultiSig Wallet [Beginners Guide]