Sealer2100 hardware wallet.

[satscraper]

Probably found the most expensive hardware wallet out there, namely, Sealer2100 currently priced at $899.

This is the fresh product to be launched by HPX in 2026.

What distinguishes it from other devices is the iris scan, which is used to unlock and authorize wallet  and also at signing transactions. The relevant diagrams can be found here.

Their marketing claims it is open-source, but the Sealer2100 repo describes itself as "auditable but not reusable," so a better term here would be "source-verifiable."

"The device stores private keys in a CC EAL6+ certified TMC THD89 secure element, physically isolated from the main processor. Iris templates are encrypted and stored within that same chip, with no network transmission pathway. The iris recognition system uses 2048 encrypted biometric feature points with infrared liveness detection, designed to counter spoofing attempts using photographs, silicone replicas, or 3D-printed models." (https://www.sealer2100.com/en/blog/article?id=16)

[m2017]

Probably found the most expensive hardware wallet out there, namely, Sealer2100 currently priced at $899.

To me, it seems somewhat irrational to pay an inflated price for a device from an obscure manufacturer - one that hasn't specialized in these products before (did they even make such hardware wallets previously?) and thus lacks the extensive experience and engineering track record of established brands - simply because of an eye scanner; after all, even Coldcard has had vulnerabilities.

This is the fresh product to be launched by HPX in 2026.

And like any new product, it could contain numerous bugs and vulnerabilities. I certainly wouldn't store assets in it - at least not initially.

What distinguishes it from other devices is the iris scan, which is used to unlock and authorize wallet  and also at signing transactions. The relevant diagrams can be found here.

I believe the primary function of these HW devices is to protect assets from online (that is, those who lack the physical ability to interact with this device) attackers (something Coldcard failed to do) and from "stupid" offline thieves (via PIN protection). However, these devices can't protect against robbers; if someone confronts you with a $5 wrench, no PIN or iris scanner can prevent unauthorized access to your crypto assets. In a worst-case scenario, robbers could simply hold the scanner up to the owner's eyes to unlock the wallet.

In other words, this distinction doesn't make hardware wallet superior to others (in terms of security).

Their marketing claims it is open-source, but the Sealer2100 repo describes itself as "auditable but not reusable," so a better term here would be "source-verifiable."

So, it turns out this open source isn't exactly open source?

"The device stores private keys in a CC EAL6+ certified TMC THD89 secure element, physically isolated from the main processor. Iris templates are encrypted and stored within that same chip, with no network transmission pathway. The iris recognition system uses 2048 encrypted biometric feature points with infrared liveness detection, designed to counter spoofing attempts using photographs, silicone replicas, or 3D-printed models." (https://www.sealer2100.com/en/blog/article?id=16)

And all of this becomes useless if there is even a single vulnerability. What is the likelihood of that on a fresh device?

[Lucius]

I wonder if the $900 price tag is justified solely because the device has an eye scanner? I don't know how complex (complicated) this technology is, so maybe that justifies the price, but I wonder what happens in the event that the user experiences an accident in which his eye is damaged or even lost completely?

It would be logical to have a backup option if unlocking with an eye scan is no longer possible for some reason.

[Zaguru12]

I wonder if the $900 price tag is justified solely because the device has an eye scanner? I don't know how complex (complicated) this technology is, so maybe that justifies the price, but I wonder what happens in the event that the user experiences an accident in which his eye is damaged or even lost completely?

It would be logical to have a backup option if unlocking with an eye scan is no longer possible for some reason.

Spot on, I haven’t read any where that the hardware wallet actually has any other means of unlocking the device either through other biometrics like finger print or even pin or password and this is definitely a trade off for someone like me because over a very long period of time we all know how face recognition even on phones have issues of Face ID and that means at that the wallet is useless by then, the owner would have to go back and use recovery phrase on another device. Too poor for a $900 wallet

[Nheer]

I wonder if the $900 price tag is justified solely because the device has an eye scanner? I don't know how complex (complicated) this technology is, so maybe that justifies the price, but I wonder what happens in the event that the user experiences an accident in which his eye is damaged or even lost completely?

It would be logical to have a backup option if unlocking with an eye scan is no longer possible for some reason.

Spot on, I haven’t read any where that the hardware wallet actually has any other means of unlocking the device either through other biometrics like finger print or even pin or password and this is definitely a trade off for someone like me because over a very long period of time we all know how face recognition even on phones have issues of Face ID and that means at that the wallet is useless by then, the owner would have to go back and use recovery phrase on another device. Too poor for a $900 wallet

The hardware wallet do have a back up unlocking method. It specifically supports both Pin + Iris verification.
It would not be ideal to not have a back up way of unlocking the device in case of unforeseen events like accident. Losing or damaging an eye won't make the device unaccessible, it would even be unwise of the developers if they hadn't thought of events like this and made a solution for it.

The price is a really a good question though. $900 is a high price to pay for a wallet since we already have way cheaper wallets that offers strong security. If there are no other reasonable benefits or security that makes it a better choice other than the iris verification then it's not enough reason to choose the wallet IMO.

[satscraper]

It seems that I was wrong about  Sealer2100 not having launched yet. According to their shop, this wallet can already be purchased and delivered. Besides, they sell another wallet, namely HyperMate Pro, which has the fingerprint scanner instead of an iris one. The price for HyperMate Pro is much lower, only $229.

[RGBTC]

but I wonder what happens in the event that the user experiences an accident in which his eye is damaged or even lost completely?

We will have to wait and see what happens if a user experiences such an incident  , given that they have set aside 10 BTC for ecosystem protection. It needs to be clarified whether these claims cover issues like eye damage or device durability, or only those related to vulnerabilities in device operations. After all, their users are part of the ecosystem.

10 BTC Security Fund
A dedicated fund supports security research, bug bounties and ecosystem protection.

[satscraper]

but I wonder what happens in the event that the user experiences an accident in which his eye is damaged or even lost completely?

I think that such event would be terrible not only for users of devices with iris scanning, but also for owners of generic hardware wallets.

Hardware wallets are not suitable for blind people.

They probably need devices with braille capability and text-to-speech functionality, but such wallets are unlikely to see the light of day.

[dkbit98]

There is no way I would spend $900 on this crap, and anyone doing that is insane.
It's good to see they have open source code and air-gapped security, but you still have to send them money and your personal details.
I don't like using my iris for anything, and I think his crap is mostly created for shitcoins with web3 and 50 blockchain support.

[X-ray]

I can buy tons of hardware wallets for redundancy or even create multi signature with different sets of hardware wallet from different companies which is infinitely more secure than having an additional eye scanner with that budget.

$900 is ridiculous and it isn't even going to increase the security more than existing hardware wallet, just an eye scanner is nothing.

I can imagine how after 4 to 5 years of use, how much micro scratching on the lens is going to disrupt functionality of the eye scanner.

More moving parts means more bugs and more hardware failure, it's definitely a no go for me.

[joniboini]

I'd like to see how much it cost to build this HW, and which parts are the most expensive. Paying nearly $1k for a wallet doesn't sound bad if you have millions of assets, but at the same time there are better options that is cheaper and more popular than this. I wonder what's their basis for pricing at that point. It's close to Steam Frame which you can use for various purpose (which is still expensive as hell).

[Lucius]

I'd like to see how much it cost to build this HW, and which parts are the most expensive. Paying nearly $1k for a wallet doesn't sound bad if you have millions of assets, but at the same time there are better options that is cheaper and more popular than this.
~snip~

Does it make sense even if you have millions of $ in cryptocurrencies? Personally, I don't see the point, but it might make sense for some people who want to show off such a gadget online or in public. I would always choose something that is open source, air-gapped and does not have biometric sensors, which are obviously quite expensive considering the price of this HW.

[Pmalek]

According to the website, they use an Apache 2.0 license. Multiple sources report this license as being open-source, so I guess their claim is correct.
This isn't the first hardware wallet that uses biometrics in some form. Previously, we saw G-Knot that has finger vein scanner. D'CENT is also a biometric wallet and has a fingerprint scanner. Maybe there are others. I don't find the product appealing at all. I have never been a fan of overcomplicating things. We now have wallets with fingerprint scanners, blood vessel scanners, and iris scanners. Bone marrow scanners are next.

I wonder if the $900 price tag is justified solely because the device has an eye scanner?

It's too expensive. The device is shipped with a signal-blocking case, a steel plate for seed backups, and an engraving pen.

[Lucius]

~snip~

I wonder if the $900 price tag is justified solely because the device has an eye scanner?

It's too expensive. The device is shipped with a signal-blocking case, a steel plate for seed backups, and an engraving pen.

If all these accessories are of good quality, then maybe the price makes sense to some extent. I remembered that in the past I had seen hardware wallets that cost much more, like Corazon whose models cost as much as $2000.

Titanium obviously comes at a price, but I've seen pictures of Trezors that survived fire and dogs that used them to sharpen their teeth.