21 sats \ 1 reply \ @BTCExecutor 8 Aug \ parent \ on: Exploring Multi-Sig Setups: Seeking Thoughts on Casa and Alternatives bitcoin
Is it just Casa that can see all your UTXOs, or any collaborative custody service that holds your multisig descriptor file?
It's cool but I don't know why I need this. Why is it better than using a regular hardware wallet?
-
costs $25, less than most HWWs
-
can use for other 2FA and MFA
-
not obvious for bitcoin, so won’t be on a “list” of ppl who buy bitcoin only products
ATM collaborative custody is the best choice to minimize risk of catastrophic loss upon your death, while having most (not all) of the benefits of self-custody
Best practice: hold your BTC in some type of multi-factor wallet
Larger stack: consider a collaborative custody multisig with casa, unchained, nunchuk, liana, etc. All have pros and cons, but all greatly reduce risk of total loss upon death. Don't try DIY multsig, most ppl with mess it up
Smaller stack: poor man's multisig (singlesig + passphrase). Share seed phrase with heirs, passphrase with executor (someone not an heir). Again, pros and cons, but pretty simple so reduces risk of catestrophic loss.
Don't rely on treasure maps, letters of instruction, those fail WAY more often than you think.
Citizen Kane: saw somewhere it's the best movie alltime, it was boring
English Patient. Best nap of my life
LA LA Land. Was much acclaimed, wife and I turned it off after about 15 mins.
Avengers End Game: I enjoyed all the other Marvel Movies up until that point. End Game was a bore, diminished all the prior movies, and I've stopped watching MCU since.
Trezor + other wallet because:
- Coldcard probably too complex for most newish users
- Ledger's declining reputation
- Trezor still ubiquitous, lot's of videos and resources. Plus very easy UI
very slow cold launch of the application on a powerful smartphone
Yes, Bluewallet is reallllly slow on my iphone (connecting to my own node over Tor). But it has lightning, which is nice
Otherwise, agree Green for daily watch-only use.
Nice writeup
Perhaps an "attack" with the lesser goal of (even just temporarily) making non-bitcoiners less confident in usability.
I guess a possible way for bad actors to try and slow adoption?
Appreciate the reply, just trying to think it through
I think so.
I'm assuming the bad-actor is willing to pay to attack the usability of the network. And this could be cheaper than an attempted 51% attack (if I understand correctly).
I don't believe the current fee rates are an attack. It just made me wonder if fees are a possible attack vector on the usability of the network.
I may have chosen DDOS as a poor wording, but to my layman eyes it still seems like a similar concept. Flood the mempool with intentionally bloated and expensive transactions with the ill-intent to disrupt actual users from transacting (unless willing to outbid).
No problems with the role miners play.
I'm curious if a well-funded bad actor, say a nation-state, could flood the mempool with high-fee transactions to disrupt "normal" usage.
If I understand correctly. perhaps creating many many transaction of huge file sizes (videos, high res image files, etc.). With the ill-intent of slowing down (or making prohibitively expensive) the network for all other users.
Wondering what would prevent this from happening