Key wallet.

[satscraper]

Recently I had  conversation with Forsyth Jones, who was looking for wallet without bells and whistles.

It seems I’ve found such wallet - Key wallet.

At its core, this is minimal, self‑contained and autonomous wallet. It may be useful for users who want simple, lightweight, open‑source source-verifiable Android wallet.

The latest release is 3.3

Unfortunately starting from version 2.6 Key Wallet dropped support for hardware wallets.

[Kruw]

Recently I had  conversation with Forsyth Jones, who was looking for wallet without bells and whistles.

It seems I’ve found such wallet - Key wallet.

At its core, this is minimal, self‑contained, autonomous wallet ^{(no backend servers, no cloud, no remote API dependencies)} with no tracking and no external services. It may be useful for users who want simple, lightweight, open‑source Android wallet.

This doesn't sound very "minimal" to me...

[satscraper]

Recently I had  conversation with Forsyth Jones, who was looking for wallet without bells and whistles.

It seems I’ve found such wallet - Key wallet.

At its core, this is minimal, self‑contained, autonomous wallet ^{(no backend servers, no cloud, no remote API dependencies)} with no tracking and no external services. It may be useful for users who want simple, lightweight, open‑source Android wallet.

This doesn't sound very "minimal" to me...

According to notes in  3.2.6 release this feature was added exclusively for Tactical Advantage clients. I believe that if you are not one of their clients, this option will simply remain inactive. However, if you feel that this add‑on makes the wallet less minimalistic, you can continue using version 2.6 instead, because the “Earn account” integration was introduced only in Restart (3.0 )release, which came after 2.6.

[n0nce]

I'd recommend some better-known open-source mobile wallet options over this 'Key Wallet'.

• BlueWallet
  
• Aqua Wallet
  
• Envoy
  

Otherwise, there's a pretty comprehensive list by dkbit98 of open-source wallets (although multi-coin) here.

[Forsyth Jones]

I'd never seen that before. Why would a wallet remove hardware wallets support?

I think no wallet will ever be as good as Bitcoin Core, precisely because it's simple yet has all the features a coin could have from a core wallet.

As for mobile wallets, the best we have is one that's good at some things and flawed in others, so sometimes I use 2 or 3 wallets with the same seed, renowned wallets like bluewallet, etc.

[satscraper]

I'd recommend some better-known open-source mobile wallet options over this 'Key Wallet'.

• BlueWallet
  
• Aqua Wallet
  
• Envoy
  

Otherwise, there's a pretty comprehensive list by dkbit98 of open-source wallets (although multi-coin) here.

Sorry, but your recommendation is a bit off‑topic because in the OP it was stated that this thread is open as the response to a user who wanted the simplest wallet possible, without any bells and whistles. I wouldn’t say that the wallet you recommended belongs to that class of wallets.

Why would a wallet remove hardware wallets support?

They’re probably trying to be the simplest wallet in the world, just as you wanted.

On a serious note, a likely reason is simply the lack of development resources.

[ABCbits]

I think Electrum partly meet this criteria. Some advances features are hidden by default and you don't have to use LN.

At its core, this is minimal, self‑contained and autonomous wallet. It may be useful for users who want simple, lightweight, open‑source Android wallet.

It's so minimal, that they don't bother upload it to Google Play. No wonder i never hear about this wallet.

I'd recommend some better-known open-source mobile wallet options over this 'Key Wallet'.

• BlueWallet
  
• Aqua Wallet
  
• Envoy
  

Otherwise, there's a pretty comprehensive list by dkbit98 of open-source wallets (although multi-coin) here.

Envoy seems to match "simple" criteria and created by Foundation, but it's weird there's only 1K+ download on Google Play despite created in 2023.

[n0nce]

Sorry, but your recommendation is a bit off‑topic because in the OP it was stated that this thread is open as the response to a user who wanted the simplest wallet possible, without any bells and whistles. I wouldn’t say that the wallet you recommended belongs to that class of wallets.

These wallets are Bitcoin-only, open-source and quite simple to use.
Even if some of them have advanced (but in my opinion necessary) features like the ability to use Tor and a private Electrum server, you do not have to use them.

I onboarded multiple first-time Bitcoiners with these wallets very successfully, hence why I recommended them.

Only now I realized the original poster was looking for an alternative to Trezor Suite, so most likely he actually needs a desktop wallet. In that case, there are Electrum, Sparrow, or even just Bitcoin Core. I'm not sure we need a whole thread for the quest after the 'most simple wallet', as it is trivial to figure out with all the lists and guides that already exist.

Envoy seems to match "simple" criteria and created by Foundation, but it's weird there's only 1K+ download on Google Play despite created in 2023.

Likely because many people aren't aware that this is a decent mobile wallet, without having to purchase a Passport device. One thing I'd wish for is coin control, but most mobile wallets sadly lack this feature.

[Mia Chloe]

Recently I had  conversation with Forsyth Jones, who was looking for wallet without bells and whistles.
Unfortunately starting from version 2.6 Key Wallet dropped support for hardware wallets.

I might just test out the wallet for the sake of testing it out and not really because I'm gonna continue using it mostly because it's not too popular and I don't really trust it even if it might be a good one. Blue wallet does almost everything you'll basically need for a bitcoin only wallet.

When it comes to wallets most times what matters really is what it offers and then again personal preference like for example I personally prefer Electrum over almost any other wallet mostly on mobile.

[dkbit98]

Adding a space ship on website home page looks silly, and to me it looks more like a website for new sci-fi crap movie.  
Another thing I don't like is that only way to install this wallet is with APK file on android devices.
I wouldn't risk using this wallet for anything other than simple testing.

[satscraper]

Adding a space ship on website home page looks silly, and to me it looks more like a website for new sci-fi crap movie.  

Not silly in fact, judging by the fact that they’ve been with Bitcoin for 10+ years. During this span many wallets have bitten the dust, but Key Wallet hasn’t. So the spaceship on their homepage may hint that the build of their wallet is as reliable ^{at least} as  that one relevant to space ship

Another thing I don't like is that only way to install this wallet is with APK file on android devices.

Using this way they doesnt depend on Google's whims.   ^{I like ARKs}.

[bitmover]

Adding a space ship on website home page looks silly, and to me it looks more like a website for new sci-fi crap movie.  
Another thing I don't like is that only way to install this wallet is with APK file on android devices.
I wouldn't risk using this wallet for anything other than simple testing.

I agree...

That ship looks very unprofessional. If the ship was the logo of their company or the name of the wallet, but it isn't...

I also think that they should at least made the app available at Google Play Store, like most good wallets.

There isn't even a download button in their website, you need to go into github. Most users won't even be able to install such wallet in their devices.

[nc50lc]

I think Electrum partly meet this criteria. Some advances features are hidden by default and you don't have to use LN.

Yeah, and check this out:


"History" (transactions), "Send" and "Receive" tabs by disabling the other tabs in View menu.

Those tabs' features wont work anyways like lightning as long as the user wont set up a channel.
Pre-installed plug-ins like Nostr are optional to disable/enable as well.

[satscraper]

Envoy seems to match "simple" criteria

I think Electrum partly meet this criteria. Some advances features are hidden by default and you don't have to use LN.

Formally ^{by outward signs} - yes, but in reality - ^big Nope.

Minimalistic wallets have a smaller attack surface because of the smaller codebase, which means both smaller number of weak points for code injection and easier line-by-line auditing.

Feature-rich wallets ^{with Lightning support, swapping and importing implementations, integation of various external APIs, sophisticated backup schemes, etc.}  have much larger codebases ^{and are therefore more vulnerable to potential attacks} which don't shrink when some of their features are "hidden." Every feature ^{even when hidden} is a potential door through which your stash can either be stolen or disappear due to your carelessness.

[satscraper]

Key wallet was rebranded as eWallet in version 3.4.

 It's a big update with plenty of improvements and fixes.

 It adds support for Drivechain's eCash sidechain on the Dry Run 4 testnet ^{/ Please be aware that BIP300/301 hasn't activated on Bitcoin mainnet, so this is for testnet only}

A few fixes to notice: change addresses are now picked randomly instead of always the same one, blockchain reorgs are now handled properly, and there's new prompt asking which network an address belongs to when it could match more than one chain.

 On the downside, looks like BIP322 message sign/verify feature has been removed.

Relevant commits can be found here.

[nc50lc]

It may be useful for users who want simple, lightweight, open‑source Android wallet.

The "open-source" part needs to be updated.

Upon checking their repo's readme, it's more of a "source verifiable" code rather than "open-source" where the public can make changes to its code.
Only them have the full control over its development.

Reference:

Contributing
PRs are not welcome, this code is only made public to make it possible to inspect and verify it. Third party PRs will most likely be rejected so please don't waste your time on them.

[satscraper]

It may be useful for users who want simple, lightweight, open‑source Android wallet.

The "open-source" part needs to be updated.

Upon checking their repo's readme, it's more of a "source verifiable" code rather than "open-source" where the public can make changes to its code.
Only them have the full control over its development.

Reference:

Contributing
PRs are not welcome, this code is only made public to make it possible to inspect and verify it. Third party PRs will most likely be rejected so please don't waste your time on them.

Thanks, I made the relevant correction.

I just always treated open-source code as something I could read myself because I was never inclined to make any changes to it. But you are right, "source-verifiable" is a more precise definition in the case of eWallet.



Sept.^23th: new release, namely 4.1, centred on USDT loans.




October 25^th latest release 4.1.1

[satscraper]

Attention!

Urgent action is needed. Update your Key wallet to the latest release, namely 4.1-22: RBF tx forgery bugfix, which prevents from "Malicious server can replace a just-broadcast tx and try to trick user into RBF-ing it" valnurability".

The similar fixes were done previously in Electrum and Cake wallets.

[nc50lc]

The similar fixes were done previously in Electrum and Cake wallets.

At this point, we need to have a list of light clients that use Electrum protocol for SPV and able to connect to random Electrum servers.
Because if that wallet supports RBF and doesn't check the output(s),
it's most likely vulnerable to that same issue.

Even other light clients that don't use Electrum's protocol might have a similar attack vector as long as they rely on random public servers.
Of course, that excludes BIP157/158 light clients.

[satscraper]

The similar fixes were done previously in Electrum and Cake wallets.

At this point, we need to have a list of light clients that use Electrum protocol for SPV and able to connect to random Electrum servers.
Because if that wallet supports RBF and doesn't check the output(s),

Looks like Sparrow falls into this category.

I’ve already recommended that users who rely on public servers configure trusted server manually.

That said, I agree that such list would make things easier for users who don’t run their own servers.

P.S. Probably Stack wallet could be effected as it supports Electrum protocol but I didnt deployed this wallet so not sure whether it allows random/auto server selection.