Is Bluetooth a security risk for hardware wallets?

[NeuroticFish]

Which device do you suggest ? Any other one?

I didn't have my hands on many HW, so I don't have a really good suggestion.
I like the concept of SeedSigner, but I never had one in my hands, so I cannot tell if it's indeed what I need. But apart of that, Trezor has passed the test of time, so it's a great plus.

Trezor safe 3 doesnt have BT, which is good.

That's what I also have. And, although the font could be bigger, I am happy with it for now. And I've also used a Nano S before that

I wonder how long will they still offer support for trezor safe 3.   Probably a lot, I made a little research it was released in 2023. The biggest downside of ledger nano s for me is the end of support.

I didn't research for that, I don't know. Trezor advertises hard their Trezor Safe 7, but I didn't read of thoughts on getting Trezor Safe 3 discontinued.

I took a look at the Bitcoin only model, as Pmalek mentioned, it isn't available in Brazil. Any benefits for not supporting altcoins?

Less chances to get the wallet linked to some strange exchange apps that can steal your funds?
I don't play with many altcoins; last time I've checked Monero was poorly handled by Ledger and I've almost lost mine, since then I never tried another HW with Monero. So I don't care if a HW works with altcoins or not.

[Pmalek]

And imho the only minus of Trezor Safe 3 is the rather small font.

Both the Trezor One and Trezor Safe 3 come with a 0.96" OLED screen. If you only consider the display, you don't get an upgrade moving from Model One to Safe 3.

I wonder how long will they still offer support for trezor safe 3.

Trezor announced that they will continue to support the two oldest models (Model One and Model T) until at least 2036. Of course, this can always change. But assuming they stick to that plan, there is no reason to worry about end of support for Trezor Safe 3 for a very long time.

I took a look at the Bitcoin only model, as Pmalek mentioned, it isn't available in Brazil. Any benefits for not supporting altcoins?

Just get the universal one. You can still decide which firmware version to install on it. Both the Bitcoin-only and the Universal firmware work with the Universal hardware devices from Trezor. The Bitcoin-only model looks better with the orange backplate. I would rather go for the Universal one to be able to store altcoins on it as well if I so choose.

[dkbit98]

I don't like standard Bluetooth connection and I don't trust it, especially if this is used for hardware wallets.
Situation is a bit different if there is additional encryption on top of Bluetooth that makes it more secure, like Trezor Safe 7 is doing.
I prefer using camera and airgapped devices, or just regular usb cable connection.

[Cricktor]

My concerns with Bluetooth in hardware wallets are the following:

• Bluetooth stack is complex, the specs are a few thousand pages long, plenty of opportunities for bugs and bad implementations.
• Why the need for Bluetooth? Isn't it mostly because Apple doesn't open it's Lightning and now USB interface completely to other parties?
• Same for NFC as alternative and lower range communication stack. Again Apple doesn't open NFC completely, therefore cutting off their universe for hardware wallets to use NFC.

Sure, hardware wallets don't implement the full Bluetooth stack as they don't need to do so. But still, I don't have the impression that relevant Bluetooth protocols are rock solid and security hardened.

Think about it: hardware wallets implement Bluetooth because Apple patronizes its users. Seriously? OK, before you object, there are likely more reasons to offer Bluetooth "convenience".

I don't like it. But as long as you can turn off Bluetooth in hardware wallets, when you don't need or don't want it, it's bearable. The sad part is that you have to pay for it even when you don't want to use it. Shiny new world...

[Synchronice]

Honestly, I would feel absolutely safe at home with HW that has a bluetooth but I would avoid going out with my HW (with BT) in very expensive hotels, airports and so on. There are many threats everywhere but they are not applied to everyone. If you are more or less an average person with average wealth, you are fine, you are not the target but if you are someone rich, like a millionaire and people know that you own cryptocurrencies, then you should take different security measurements.

I'm going to digress a bit, but I'm curious about how dangerous it is to have BT turned on on a computer where you're performing crypto transactions at the same time? To me, it always seemed like a risk to be avoided, so I use wired headphones, although wireless would be much more comfortable.

If you have some sitting near to you who has the technology and the knowledge to make it dangerous for you to turn on bluetooth on your computer, then you either are a millionaire or have a good chance to befriend with someone intellectual
Honestly, I wouldn't worry about it, I don't think that regular people are under threat. If you are a millinoaire and own tens or hundreds or thousands of Bitcoin, then you should 100% be extremely cautious.

[PrivacyG]

the problem isn’t bluetooth itself, but rather poor implementation.

Which can not be said about complete airgap.  And that implicitly makes Bluetooth less secure.

On the other hand.  I am pretty sure most things that emit frequencies and signals can be tracked too.  Keyboard signals, HDDs and many other things.  Which means you have to fall under a particular category of citizens to ever be a victim of a Bitcoin theft done this way.  Such as being followed by a Three Letter Agency or a very advanced obsessive 'hacker'.

My opinion is that the risk of possibly having the wrong implementation of a non airgapped function does not out weigh the benefits you get for having it.  I would much rather have a steel strong security with a QR scanning camera instead than a Bluetooth function that may put my device at risk.  I may not be the particular case where such advanced methods are used, but one person being in that situation is already too many to me!