No matter how you want to put it this person will definitely loss some confidence and trust in the self custody because he wouldn’t want to be a second victim again. I mean a lot of people haven’t even recovered from the first incident and loses.
Is this not leading to where self custody is going to be disregarded? We know the advantages but the losses are brutal and not easy to take on. What the best form of cold storage? What could be the possible solution to this?
Trust is lost on Coldcard, not on self-custody. Self custodian wallet remains the best option for me and many people. Because Coldcard was vulnerable to an attack, it doesn't mean every other self-custodian wallet out there is vulnerable to the same attack.
What I want to suggest might not be suitable for some persons because they might need to sell their Bitcoin during emergencies but truly it can help if someone intended to hold their Bitcoin for a long time in a cold storage. So, the idea is to "time lock your Bitcoin." If you are holding your Bitcoin in a cold storage which you intend to hold it for a long time (4 years or more), you can just lock the coin in that wallet for the period of time you don't want to spend it, meaning that even the hackers can not touch your Bitcoin because it's locked. Second idea is to use open source wallets that allows you to set pass phrase, so that aside the seed phrase, there is a second security to your wallet, the hacker might have your seed phrase but not the pass phrase.
Self custody should always be considered greatly because even the centralized custody is not 100% safe, there have been several hacks on CEX and huge amount were lost.
Both options make a lot of sense, but I will go for the first option. According to my goals, longevity or duration I like to hold my BTC for, that is how long I am going to set a time lock. Hackers will be disappointed if they can't access the coin.