One bad egg doesn't equals the the rest

[Emjay24]

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

It is just the reaction to the ColdCard wallet hack and nothing else..
About going to centralized platform... Liguid Network was hacked recently and 600BTC is still in the recovery process, Revolut gave out vital KYC documents to scammers recently, thereby revealing transaction histories of their clients and their valid IDs, phone numbers, addresses, e.t.c to the scammers. Is that what we would call a safer option? Perhaps not.

Self-custody remains the best shot, users need to prioritize using reputable open-source non-custodial wallets and avoid anything closed source for better security features. Others are no spoilt eggs, there's still better wallet providers out there. I use Electrum and I'm cool with it.

[bitLeap]

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

About the agenda it's just a bonus, there are disadvantaged parties and there are those who benefit.
It's normal, even when you deposit money in a bank and the bank gets problems regarding the safety of customer funds, what is the general reaction of most people? withdraw funds from the bank. All are normal reactions because there is private property that is at any time threatened. Reputation is at stake, although not all coldcard users are threatened but ultimately those who are safe have lost trust and moved assets as a precaution.

[BlackBoss_]

About the agenda it's just a bonus, there are disadvantaged parties and there are those who benefit.
It's normal, even when you deposit money in a bank and the bank gets problems regarding the safety of customer funds, what is the general reaction of most people? withdraw funds from the bank. All are normal reactions because there is private property that is at any time threatened. Reputation is at stake, although not all coldcard users are threatened but ultimately those who are safe have lost trust and moved assets as a precaution.

There will be a bank run that is terrible and in cryptocurrency industry, some years ago, you could see how FTX exchange quickly collapsed after Changpeng Zao and Binance revealed hidden fact about FTX management, and it triggered a bankrun against FTX. Consequently things happened very quickly as within a week, FTX exchange collapsed and had to announce a bankruptcy.

When a bankrun happens, reputation will be no longer important because customers will be all in their hurry of withdraw their money, and a classic insolvency situation will appear. FTX did not find any partner, business deal to help them, even CZ and Binance refused to rescue FTX exchange.

So it's better to avoid such situation with centralized exchanges and your funds there, when it happens, you will almost not have enough time to withdraw your money.

[Y3shot]

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

A hardware wallet can fail, but that doesn't mean self-custodial solutions have failed. Even if the Coldcard wallet was attacked, it doesn't mean custodial wallets and ETFs are better options. A self-custodial wallet still remains decentralized; you control your coins and your keys, which is an advantage that one cannot get from centralized exchanges.

Considering what happened to the Coldcard wallet, it might be difficult for some investors to understand that self-custodial wallets still remain the best option for the security of assets. However, in time, they will understand that custodial wallets are not even an option to consider for the safety of one's assets.

[Alpha Marine]

I will find it funny if there are actual people who will stop using hardware wallets because of that. I mean, because bad happened to one wallet, so people would stop using hardware wallets entirely? It doesn't make sense.
Exchanges have been hacked before; why didn't that stop people from using exchanges? Exchanges have also crashed, yet people still use other exchanges.
What about the banks? There have been diffenrent banks collapse in history and people have lost money, but that has not stopped people from using the banks.

I don't think it's any evil agenda as you say behind it as you say, but people have used the opportunity to advertise their services. We've seen CZ and other exchanges use the opportunity to say people to save their money in their exchanges.
I believe it's just a normal human reaction. When Bybit got hacked, we say people move their money out of exchages, but when the dust settled, it got back to business as usual.

[henmark]

If everyone is scared of hardware wallet as their safety option and self custody option who wins? Who benefits the most from this? I guess the centralised entities and the banks.

What if this is it? What if the goals of these people is to strike fear in the mind of holders that giving up their Bitcoin to custodial entities is the only way forward?

I know what many people will say, that I am just scared because one hardware wallet got ruined, ColdCard as the main example, but before you said this few people surrounding myself have already started to show this sign.

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

We can't really know if there is some agenda behind the recent coldcard attack, but the reaction of the people towards it is totally natural and humane, because when you know that something can harm you, you will fear going near it, and that's exactly what's happening right now.

Now, if you want to link this to some agenda, maybe you could say that those who are running or controlling centralized empires could be behind the attack, because they want people to fear using self-custodial services and start using them as their main source for holding or keeping their assets, but since there are no proofs or anything about this, I don't think we can say so until something actually comes up, before that, it's just guesses and speculation.

By the way, the fear we can see in the market or industry at the moment is obviously not permanent, it's just temporary, and that is because the incident is pretty new, and surely, over time, people will forget about this and things will become normal again. If such things could permanent, then we had so many hacks and incidents with centralized platforms as well, so people would have stopped using them long ago, but they didn't.

[Compromise me]

The Coldcard experience is not enough for anyone to paint these narrative that that self custody is not safe. I am not not even buying that "one bad egg crap". Over the years, exchanges, hot wallets and the rest have experienced attacks, restrictions, disappointments worse than the recent Coldcard case. Are we going to dump self custody for custodian services which carries the greater risks? This sudden switch is laughable. It makes absolutely no sense tuning back to thesame thing we condemn just because of one error that can be fixed. Truly, nothing beats self custody.

Every wallet has its own pros and cons, just because of this things are developing, but you need to understand scammers are also doing enough to do their best for having their results. It's never been easy to stay safe, you always need to do your best for having security. Hardware wallets are also having weaknesses; just because of this, arguing about them is also not ideal.I started my journey with exchanges where I lost enough funds and now having terrible results but after bad experience now I am depending on wallets which are controlled by me and I am doing enough for keeping things on good because I believe its always good to have your best Coldcard is not new but its create chaos and now peoples are surely more concerned about their coins and want to have better wallets to secure coins.

[Renampun]

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

I think that these are all normal reactions from people.. anyway, when one hardware wallet fails, especially one that's trusted by many people, it will make users question the reliability of storing your assets in a hardware wallet.. moreover, for users who have limited knowledge about hardware wallets, they will immediately assume that self-custody is unreliable, even though the problem is actually with the brand of that hardware wallet that failed to maintain the security of the wallet they developed, and the impact of that affects the users who use their wallet.. but still, failure from one brand does not necessarily mean that the entire concept of self-custody is flawed.. problems from one brand must be differentiated and don't immediately label self-custody as a failure.

[gracreavix]

Just one case of an incident has destroyed the heart and minds of people. It's laughable. Because it's just one. What of centralised platforms and the many cases of them being hacked here and there. All of a sudden self custody is now scary. Let's hear word. If the person don't want self custody, it's his choice if you want it, it's your choice. Enough of deciding what people want for themselves. They have eyes and ears and hearing cases for themselves. They should decide. At the end of the day, we will all learn from our mistakes or someone else's.

[Justbillywitt]

Most average people don't want self-custody, which is why most Bitcoin investors use a centralized mechanism like CoinBase or Robinhood.

A well-known and insured exchange is by far the safest way to keep your Bitcoin. These large companies are extremely secure, and they are insured if they get hacked, so you will never lose money no matter what.

You haven’t lost your money in a centralized exchange or get locked out your account, that’s why you are sounding this way. Let me ask you this, those exchanges and big companies you are advocating for people to approach in securing their bitcoins, are they above being attacked? You talking about insurance, how many people have you seen or heard that were refunded their lost bitcoins due to exchange hack? If my assets are not safe with me securing it, I don’t think any third party can secure it for me.

Self-custody is only a good idea for amounts under say a few hundred dollars--the amount you could afford to lose. Keeping your life savings on your physical person is completely nuts, assuming you don't have some legal reason to do so, i.e. that your money was obtained illegally and you fear prosecution, or you are trying to evade taxes.

Self custody is the best, you are just too accustomed to the centralized system. It has eaten deep into you that you think others having control over your assets, is better than you controlling it yourself and use it anytime you want without taking permission from others. When they are just doing the same thing you could have done better.

[Hyphen(-)]

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

Then your friends are not using the hardware wallets before now, if not, just because if the COLDCARD incident, they can’t just change their mind on hardware wallets and decide to give up their privacy just like that when there are other hardware wallets that have been there, reputable and also trustworthy. Many investors are using them and they don’t have problem.

There are wallets that are open-source and are good to be used, they have good reputation and can be trusted, what you just have to do is to make sure you have keep your seed phrase safe, backed it up properly offline and you are safe.

There is no point if going back to centralized exchanges and banks to keep your Bitcoin, be responsible for your assets, don’t allow anyone to control them for you.

[goldkingcoiner]

If everyone is scared of hardware wallet as their safety option and self custody option who wins? Who benefits the most from this? I guess the centralised entities and the banks.

What if this is it? What if the goals of these people is to strike fear in the mind of holders that giving up their Bitcoin to custodial entities is the only way forward?

I know what many people will say, that I am just scared because one hardware wallet got ruined, ColdCard as the main example, but before you said this few people surrounding myself have already started to show this sign.

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

I think it is just human reaction, completely normal and expected.

But I would be amiss if I said the hardware wallet situation has not shaken even me a bit. Because every time we accept the software/hardware of a third party, we take an extra risk. A risk that with Bitcoin alone you would not have. This security risk is inherently part of whatever is built on top of Bitcoin.

It just goes to show, there is no such thing as safe. Every wallet has weak points. Especially a wallet made by a third party.

[Pandorak]

If everyone is scared of hardware wallet as their safety option and self custody option who wins? Who benefits the most from this? I guess the centralised entities and the banks.

What if this is it? What if the goals of these people is to strike fear in the mind of holders that giving up their Bitcoin to custodial entities is the only way forward?

I know what many people will say, that I am just scared because one hardware wallet got ruined, ColdCard as the main example, but before you said this few people surrounding myself have already started to show this sign.

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

To be honest, the ColdCard incident is really bad news for holders, but i think this is just a normal reaction.

Basically, no matter where you store your Bitcoin, there will always be risks involved, no matter how small. But if given the choice between self custody and using a custodian, i would with full awareness choose self custody despite all the risks. Just because of the ColdCard incident doesn’t mean that all hardware wallets are no longer secure.

[Dogedegen]

If everyone is scared of hardware wallet as their safety option and self custody option who wins? Who benefits the most from this? I guess the centralised entities and the banks.

What if this is it? What if the goals of these people is to strike fear in the mind of holders that giving up their Bitcoin to custodial entities is the only way forward?

I know what many people will say, that I am just scared because one hardware wallet got ruined, ColdCard as the main example, but before you said this few people surrounding myself have already started to show this sign.

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

This example should be used to improve the understanding of the risks of hardware wallets. They were often talked about as the best option for people by far, and these risks were ignored or intentionally made weaker than they were. Users often talk against centralized exchanges or other centralized custodial platforms and mention all kinds of risks with them, but they then unfairly ignore the risks of self custody, hardware wallets and similar stuff. If we want to be fair and rational, we must weigh these options correctly and list all of their benefits and risks. The lesson from this incident is that every hardware wallet must be used with a passphrase. Passphrases were seen as optional before, but this advice now seems to have been a mistake. We should tell people to always set up passphrases and this will protect them from some of the attacks like the one in the ColdCard incident.

Some of the hardware wallets have very good implementations for passphrases, so it does not cost a user anything other than writing an extra set of characters with their seed phrase or at another location if they want security against a physical attack too.

[Audrey Simmons]

The Coldcard experience is not enough for anyone to paint these narrative that that self custody is not safe. I am not not even buying that "one bad egg crap". Over the years, exchanges, hot wallets and the rest have experienced attacks, restrictions, disappointments worse than the recent Coldcard case. Are we going to dump self custody for custodian services which carries the greater risks? This sudden switch is laughable. It makes absolutely no sense tuning back to thesame thing we condemn just because of one error that can be fixed. Truly, nothing beats self custody.

Most users felt using a hardware wallet was all that it takes to keep their Bitcoin safe, after the hack, it felt disappointing to them that something like this could happen and cost a huge loss for those who felt they were backed up properly under a cold storage system.

I would have felt the same way if my Bitcoin got tangled up in the recent hack, but that wouldn't have stopped me from practicing self-custody.

[Slow death]

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

There is no sinister agenda, nor are there banks sabotaging hardware wallets. What actually exists are people who view the internet as a lawless frontier and the cryptocurrency market as a prime target; these thieves dedicate days, weeks, or even months to stealing cryptocurrency from others. One need only look at the numerous reports of cryptocurrency theft to see that they are not targeting hardware wallets exclusively, but rather anything that holds cryptocurrency.

Nearly 14,000 crypto holders face security risk after data breach

Is regarding the news about Trezor one might think that thieves are targeting only hardware wallets, but looking at further reports, we see that they are attacking exchanges as well.

KiloEx exchange exploiter returns all stolen funds after $7.5M hack

source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/kiloex-exploiter-returns-5-5-m-7-5-m-dex-exploit

There have been many instances of hacker attacks on exchanges likely because thieves saw no other place holding large amounts of cryptocurrency that was easier to steal. After targeting exchanges, they realized that hardware wallets could also be targets; as the price of Bitcoin soared, people holding coins in hardware wallets found themselves sitting on significant sums of money, making them targets as well. Most banks do not get involved with cryptocurrencies; they have no need to employ hackers or commit crimes to sabotage hardware wallets, simply because most people use banks even those who own hardware wallets.

[Floxynice]

The Coldcard experience is not enough for anyone to paint these narrative that that self custody is not safe. I am not not even buying that "one bad egg crap". Over the years, exchanges, hot wallets and the rest have experienced attacks, restrictions, disappointments worse than the recent Coldcard case. Are we going to dump self custody for custodian services which carries the greater risks? This sudden switch is laughable. It makes absolutely no sense tuning back to thesame thing we condemn just because of one error that can be fixed. Truly, nothing beats self custody.

Every wallet has its own pros and cons, just because of this things are developing, but you need to understand scammers are also doing enough to do their best for having their results. It's never been easy to stay safe, you always need to do your best for having security. Hardware wallets are also having weaknesses; just because of this, arguing about them is also not ideal.I started my journey with exchanges where I lost enough funds and now having terrible results but after bad experience now I am depending on wallets which are controlled by me and I am doing enough for keeping things on good because I believe its always good to have your best Coldcard is not new but its create chaos and now peoples are surely more concerned about their coins and want to have better wallets to secure coins.

We are both arriving at the same conclusion. You've had your own experience with exchanges, and now the Coldcard incident has put phobia in people. What will they do now? Will they dump Bitcoin totally or start using the same exchanges that we all know have always had issues that cannot or are yet to be resolved? Of course, you know what the right response is. I will definitely trust cold wallets that are more secure for long-term savings than exchanges that are not secure.

The Coldcard experience is not enough for anyone to paint these narrative that that self custody is not safe. I am not not even buying that "one bad egg crap". Over the years, exchanges, hot wallets and the rest have experienced attacks, restrictions, disappointments worse than the recent Coldcard case. Are we going to dump self custody for custodian services which carries the greater risks? This sudden switch is laughable. It makes absolutely no sense tuning back to thesame thing we condemn just because of one error that can be fixed. Truly, nothing beats self custody.

Most users felt using a hardware wallet was all that it takes to keep their Bitcoin safe, after the hack, it felt disappointing to them that something like this could happen and cost a huge loss for those who felt they were backed up properly under a cold storage system.

I would have felt the same way if my Bitcoin got tangled up in the recent hack, but that wouldn't have stopped me from practicing self-custody.

Everyone felt disappointed, but truth is, there is no other safer way to store your bitcoins than through self custody. Any other option aside cold wallets are not secured. Do not be deceived.

[Hamza2424]

Most average people don't want self-custody, which is why most Bitcoin investors use a centralized mechanism like CoinBase or Robinhood.

A well-known and insured exchange is by far the safest way to keep your Bitcoin. These large companies are extremely secure, and they are insured if they get hacked, so you will never lose money no matter what.

Hmm, I would not say they are all extremely secure. We never know until they get hacked. Because they are considered extremely secure because by now, hackers can't find their way in, but one day they can. At least, they can get your information by breaching some servers and people in support teams directly through phishing emails. So you can't say all of these exchanges are extremely secure.

Instead, I would never say this to someone without giving them a disclaimer about how they can lose your money, like the FTX exchange. They did give the funds back, but at what cost? People got the USD value of the coins they held, and the conversion was based on the price at the time when it went down. So everyone made a huge loss. Many other exchanges cost people huge amounts of money. BitMart went down and then stopped withdrawals, so people were unable to withdraw their money.

Yes, you said big exchanges, but still, they are not as secure as you think.

Read this as well:

Mt Gox hacked for $8,750,000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mt._Gox#Security_breach_and_invalid_addresses_(2011)
Bitcoin7 hacked https://siliconangle.com/2011/10/07/bitcoin7-hacked-funds-recovery-requires-sensitive-personal-information/
Bitcoinica hacked for $228,000 https://www.blockstuffs.com/blog/top-10-blockchain-hacks
Bitcoinica hacked again for $87,000 https://www.blockstuffs.com/blog/top-10-blockchain-hacks
Bitcoinica hacked AGAIN for $300,000 https://www.blockstuffs.com/blog/top-10-blockchain-hacks
Bitfloor hacked for $250,000 https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitfloor-hacked-250000-missing-1346821046
Vircurex hacked for $352,000 https://vircurex.com/Reports/2013-05.pdf
Inputs.io hacked for $1,200,000 https://www.coindesk.com/hackers-steal-bitcoins-inputs-io-wallet-service
Mt.Gox hacked for $661,348,000 https://blockonomi.com/mt-gox-hack/
Picostocks hacked for $4,434,000 https://www.wired.com/2017/05/one-scrappy-startup-survived-early-bitcoin-wars/
Flexcoin hacked for $600,000 https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-bank-flexcoin-close-600000-bitcoin-theft
Poloniex hacked for $67,500 https://www.coindesk.com/poloniex-claims-customers-repaid-following-march-bitcoin-hack
Crypto Rush hacked for $630,000 https://www.ccn.com/cryptorush-support-worker-leaks-inside-info/
MintPal hacked for $1,933,000 https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-protected-vericoin-stolen-mintpal-wallet-breach
Cryptsy hacked for $9,580,000 https://www.coindesk.com/cryptsy-bankruptcy-millions-bitcoin-stolen
Bitstamp hacked for $5,100,000 https://www.coindesk.com/bitstamp-claims-roughly-19000-btc-lost-hot-wallet-hack
796 hacked for $270,000 https://cointelegraph.com/news/chinese-exchange-suffers-1000-btc-loss-in-uncertain-service-compromise
BTER hacked for $1,750,000 https://www.coindesk.com/bter-bitcoin-stolen-cold-wallet-hack
KipCoin hacked for $728,000 https://www.newsbtc.com/2015/02/19/chinese-bitcoin-exchange-kipcoin-shuts-claims-losing-3000-btc-hackers/
Bitfinex hacked for $329,000 https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitfinex-hot-wallets-hacked-1400-bitcoin-may-stolen-1432326539
Gatecoin hacked for $2,140,000 https://www.coindesk.com/gatecoin-2-million-bitcoin-ether-security-breach
ShapeShift hacked for $200,000 http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/04/25/shapeshift-hack-simply-incredible/
Bitfinex hacked for $72,000,000 http://fortune.com/2016/08/03/bitcoin-stolen-bitfinex-hack-hong-kong/
Bitcurex hacked for $1,500,000 https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcurex-forced-million-theft/
Yapizon hacked for $4,850,000 https://cointelegraph.com/news/korean-bitcoin-exchange-yapizon-confirms-5-mln-hack-all-customers-to-pay-with-balances
Bithumb hacked https://bravenewcoin.com/insights/fourth-largest-bitcoin-exchange-bithumb-hacked-for-billions-of-won
YouBit hacked https://cryptovest.com/news/another-bitcoin-exchange-hacked-youbit-files-bankruptcy-after-losing-users-coins/
LocalBitcoins hacked for $27,000 https://cryptonews.com/news/localbitcoins-hacked-8-bitcoins-stolen-3273.htm
Coincheck hacked for $500,000,000 http://fortune.com/2018/01/31/coincheck-hack-how/
BitGrail hacked for $170,000,000 https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/12/bitgrail-hack-nano/
Coinrail hacked for $40,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/coinrail-exchange-hacked-loses-possibly-40-million-in-cryptos
Bithumb hacked for $31,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/bithumb-exchanges-31-million-hack-know-dont-know
Bancor hacked for $23,500,000 https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/10/bancor-loses-23-5m/
Zaif hacked for $60,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/crypto-exchange-zaif-hacked-in-60-million-6000-bitcoin-theft
MapleChange hacked for $5,000,000 https://blockonomi.com/maplechange-hacked-scam/
Cryptopia hacked for $3,620,000 https://www.coindesk.com/new-zealand-crypto-exchange-cryptopia-goes-offline-citing-major-hack
Coinmama hacked https://www.ccn.com/breaking-major-crypto-brokerage-coinmama-hacked-450000-users-affected-in-massive-worldwide-breach/
DragonEx hacked https://www.coindesk.com/singapore-based-crypto-exchange-dragonex-has-been-hacked
Coinbene hacked for $100,000,000 https://cointelegraph.com/news/over-100-million-missing-coinbene-claims-maintenance-a-month-of-questions-point-toward-a-hack
Bithumb hacked for $13,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/crypto-exchange-bithumb-hacked-for-13-million-in-suspected-insider-job
Bitrue hacked for $4,200,000 https://www.coindesk.com/singapore-exchange-bitrue-hacked-for-over-4-million-in-crypto
BITPoint hacked for $32,000,000 https://www.ccn.com/news/50000-users-bitpoint-hack/2019/07/16/
Upbit hacked for $49,000,000 https://upbit.com/service_center/notice?id=1085
Altsbit hacked for $73,000 https://twitter.com/altsbit/status/1225319347687653377
BlockFi hacked https://blockfi-s3-static-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/pdf/Incident+Post+Mortem%2C+May+14%2C+2020.pdf
BuyUcoin hacked https://news.bitcoin.com/indian-cryptocurrency-exchange-buyucoin-hacked-data-users-leaked/
Eterbase hacked for $5,400,000 https://securityboulevard.com/2020/09/eterbase-exchange-hacked-hackers-stole-5-4-mn/
KuCoin hacked for $280,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/hackers-drain-kucoin-crypto-exchanges-funds
Livecoin hacked https://www.zdnet.com/article/russian-crypto-exchange-livecoin-hacked-after-it-lost-control-of-its-servers/
Cryptopia hacked for $45,000 https://news.bitcoin.com/troubled-nz-crypto-exchange-cryptopia-suffers-another-hack-in-the-midst-of-liquidation-process/
Hotbit hacked https://news.bitcoin.com/cryptocurrency-exchange-hotbit-hacked-2-million-users/
Liquid hacked for $80,000,000 https://cointelegraph.com/news/breaking-liquid-exchange-hacked-to-the-tune-of-80-million
BitMart hacked for $150,000,000 https://www.theblockcrypto.com/linked/126367/crypto-exchange-bitmart-reportedly-hacked-for-100-million
AscendEX hacked for $78,000,000 https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/127231/crypto-exchange-ascendex-hacked-for-78-million-in-latest-swindle
LCX hacked for $6,800,000 https://cointelegraph.com/news/lcx-loses-6-8m-in-a-hot-wallet-compromise-over-ethereum-blockchain
Deribit hacked for $28,000,000 https://cointelegraph.com/news/deribit-crypto-exchange-halts-withdrawals-amid-28m-hot-wallet-hack
GDAC hacked for $13,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/04/10/s-korean-crypto-exchange-gdac-hacked-for-nearly-13m/
Coins.ph hacked for $12,200,000 https://www.theblock.co/post/258701/philippines-based-exchange-coins-ph-appears-to-have-lost-12-2-million-xrp-in-possible-exploit
Poloniex hacked for $114,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/12/13/htx-poloniex-assets-are-100-safe-says-justin-sun-after-200m-hack
HTX hacked for $30,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/12/13/htx-poloniex-assets-are-100-safe-says-justin-sun-after-200m-hack
DMM Bitcoin hacked for $305,000,000 https://www.japantimes.co.jp/business/2024/06/01/tech/dmm-bitcoin-billions-lost/
WazirX hacked for $230,000,000 https://wazirx.com/blog/important-update-cyber-attack-incident-and-measures-to-protect-your-assets/
BingX hacked for $43,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2024/09/20/crypto-exchange-bingx-hacked-onchain-data-shows-over-43m-drained
Bybit hacked for $1,460,000,000 https://www.coindesk.com/business/2025/02/21/bybit-experiences-usd1-46b-in-suspicious-outflows-zachxbt
Grinex hacked for $15,000,000 https://www.theblock.co/post/397814/russia-linked-grinex-exchange-suspends-operations-15-million-hack-hostile-states

Source of all this list comes from https://www.chainsec.io/exchange-hacks.  And I am pretty sure they missed a few...

[Felicity_Tide]

If everyone is scared of hardware wallet as their safety option and self custody option who wins? Who benefits the most from this? I guess the centralised entities and the banks.

What if this is it? What if the goals of these people is to strike fear in the mind of holders that giving up their Bitcoin to custodial entities is the only way forward?

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

Too many "what if" won't solve any problem for anyone who's already doubting the essence of self custody via hardware wallet.
Centralized entities?, common, a person who knows the history of major attacks wouldn't even consider thinking about that because that's not even an option to fall back to, so there's no way they are benefiting anything.

I personally don't see the recent incident as a major reason to push people into giving up the custody of their coins. I see it as an incident that helps us reflect and question our choice of hardware wallet. Whatever reaction you're observing now is something I assume to be normal, but again I don't see it as enough reason for users to abandon their belief in self custody.

[Odogwu-Blockchain]

It's what made me think this way, my friends are already complaining that hardware wallets aren't safe anymore, one fell and others are already looking like spoilt eggs.

Is there any evil agenda behind this or it's just normal human reaction?

If your friend gets scared, meaning there are many people around the world that had gotten scared already by the way. Because, a lot of holders will withdraw out their portfolio from other hardware wallet to avoid such incidents that may happen in the future.

If you are suspecting the government or bank to be behind the heist, I can't tell. Because government will really fight the crypto industry a whole and not a particular Coldcard platform.