Hardware wallets shouldn't be a source of randomness. Period. Dice only. \ stacker news

pull down to refresh

Hardware wallets shouldn't be a source of randomness. Period. Dice only.

1685 sats \ 19 comments \ @standardcrypto 19 Aug bitcoin

Post coldcard fiasco, the new standard should be: hardware wallets never generate seed phrases from their own randomness, however sourced, but only accept user generated entropy.

Hardware wallet that generates its own 24 word seedphrase is a Red Flag.

Great Idea39.1%

Terrible Idea. 60.9%

23 votes \ 13h left

view all related items

379 sats \ 6 replies \ @k00b 19 Aug

I think you're wading into best practices and generic advice rather than black and white nevers. The problem is that many people trusted their device to source sufficient entropy. Dice rolls don't solve that problem if there's a bug in how dice rolls are used. The problem is trusting without verifying - dice rolls or not.

1 sat \ 2 replies \ @standardcrypto OP 19 Aug

but you still didn't vote terrible idea.

216 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 19 Aug

I don't think it's a terrible idea as a thing we encourage. It's also not a great idea for the reason I explained. Forgive my desire for nuance, but do this not that podcaster maxims are exactly how we got here.

153 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 19 Aug -210 sats

Well said.

Learn to build your own cold storage free of reliance upon third party HW touts.

Its fucking easy and almost free- it just requires you gain some basic knowledge.

Knowledge that empowers you and builds your self sovereignty security...

https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/coldstorage.html

https://www.fosslinux.com/10212/how-to-install-a-complete-ubuntu-on-a-usb-flash-drive.htm

6 sats \ 0 replies \ @standardcrypto OP 19 Aug

I bantered with the AIs about this a bit. The AIs gave the usual counterarguments.

One point I surfaced in support that I'd like to share.

(me to the AI)

Your arguments against are valid and well taken.

I like the poll and am taking the idea seriously because of the MINDSET and RITUAL this implies. It's hard to communicate the importance of randomness or quantify randomness. Even experts can get this wrong.

But if you actually do it, maybe a lot of intuition gets baked in just from a ritual that, considering the risks, doesn't take all that long.

Bitcoin is a culture, and rituals are part of how a culture transmits the key mindsets.

It's like the bible giving you rules about how much mold contamination is too much mold contamination (leviticus I think).

reply from the clanky:

your Leviticus example actually argues for something more specific than dice. Read what chapters 13–14 actually prescribe: quarantine the house seven days, come back and look again, if it's spread then pull the stones and replaster, wait, inspect a third time, and only then condemn it. The ritual isn't "here's the mold threshold." It's an escalation ladder with mandatory re-inspection by someone outside the household. The transmitted mindset isn't "mold is bad" — it's "your first look is not sufficient, and you are not the one who gets to certify your own house."

Ported over, the ritual that would have inoculated people against Coldcard isn't rolling dice. It's deriving the seed a second time, on something that isn't the device that made it, and confirming the words match. Dice-only teaches "randomness matters." Reproduce-and-compare teaches "don't trust, verify," which is the mindset that generalizes to the next failure — which won't be an RNG, it'll be something nobody's currently worried about.

The failure mode of ritual is also worth naming, since Leviticus's own tradition spent centuries arguing about it: form outlasting substance. Someone rolls 99 dice from a board game box, feels the weight of having Done The Hard Thing, and skips the passphrase and the multisig because they've already paid their dues. Effortful rituals are unusually good at generating that kind of moral licensing.

So: keep the ritual, but make verification the liturgy rather than entropy collection. Dice are a fine first sacrament. They just shouldn't be the whole rite.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @optimism 19 Aug

The problem is trusting without verifying

I gave it proper emphasis so the people in the back hear it too

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @kepford 19 Aug

Yes! This ^^

218 sats \ 0 replies \ @Filiprogrammer 19 Aug

Even if you supply your own entropy to the hardware wallet, you still have to trust it to actually use your entropy.

Best way to know that your seed is truly random is to print out the word list, cut the words out and then randomly pick 11 words. The twelth word needs to be chosen with the help of the hardware wallet, since it contains a checksum.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @SkyLords 2h

I wouldn’t say the lesson is simply “hardware RNG bad, dice good.”

Both can fail in different ways. Combining device-generated randomness with enough properly collected dice entropy seems safer than trusting only one source.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Jer 16h

I like what BitBox has on their website to guide folks through dice rolls/coin flip. It’s easy and takes no technical ability.

I’m all for rolling one’s own skew corrected entropy. If that or spending 20 hours learning about self custody best practices is a barrier to entry for someone than maybe that person isn’t ready to hold their own sats and that is okay.

6 sats \ 1 reply \ @criptopanas 19 Aug

I think that if we let a beginner generate their own entropy, there’s a good chance they’ll make mistakes, for example, always flipping a coin or rolling a die in the same way, or introducing other patterns into the process.

These seemingly small biases could reduce the randomness and result in entropy that isn’t generated correctly.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @teemupleb 19 Aug

Another mistake is to NOT put the individual seed words back after you have drawn them!

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @john_doe 23h

I voted "Terrible idea".
My personal point of view is to use multisig with different vendors.
Though realistically since others I know don't share my views I have suggested singlesig with a hardware wallet which has a budget for security and certifications.

Although certifications can lead to skewed results, at least it shows work has been done to improve security.
Additionally I don't know reports of stolen funds with wallets generated with bitcoin-cli (besides I guess those kept as hot wallets, but I don't know what Luke Dashjr used)

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @SatsMate 20 Aug

I don't think its a good idea, for many people they want a secure way to store it - in a simple and easy way. Is that too much to ask for? haha

1 sat \ 1 reply \ @npub1zapsats 19 Aug

Lolz 🤣🤣🤣
#426148

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @standardcrypto OP 19 Aug

that one aged well! 🤠

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @coffeebadger 19 Aug

Bold of you to assume there was ever a standard. We have people in our ranks ready to convert multiple whole coins of BTC into SHIB because a YouTuber's donkey said Kazakhstan can't be trusted.

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @nichrome 19 Aug

Alongside dice only I'm seeing a lot of "Use Bitcoin core client for seed generation" advice.

I always thought all (most) HWW we're using the same libraries to do it?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @GregAsks 18h freebie

It's ok, only ok... 😅👍, but I think only dice entropy is not a good direction...

For example:
https://njump.me/nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpyvps02e3t8jmj5qelqvm6j2pmjc3yj3w4ll836u2s20qpkknxh9qyfhwumn8ghj7mmxve3ksctfdch8qatz9uqzquwgh0x9nnlj5pjlyzpat76ccq2jtjp9tcnc4vahphlgc8wq2t8q03v3h6