100 sats \ 3 replies \ @CruncherDefi 4 Apr \ parent \ on: NVK v SeedSigner - Valid Concerns or Arrogants Attacks bitcoin
Or unless she is extremely sophisticated attacker with expensive and bleeding edge forensic equipment.
All hardware wallets are in the end security-by-obscurity solutions. I'll admit that level of obscuration is very high, but it's still security-by-obscurity.
Seed Signer is signer-only device. Decoupling signing and key storage is different paradigm. Having different options is good, so shitting on Seed Signer is at best a not responsible thing to do.
All hardware wallets are in the end security-by-obscurity solutions. I'll admit that level of obscuration is very high, but it's still security-by-obscurity.
I don't agree with this -- the design of secure enclaves is not about obscurity, it's about designing to make certain threat models really hard to exploit. Obscurity may be in play in other aspects of hw wallet design, but it's not the only element in play.
Seed Signer is signer-only device. Decoupling signing and key storage is different paradigm. Having different options is good, so shitting on Seed Signer is at best a not responsible thing to do.
Agree that it's a different paradigm, and agree that shitting on SS is dumb.
Also believe that shitting on CC is dumb, which is why I keep tilting at these windmills.
reply
I will expand on my reply.
Imagine we have some crazy sci-fi 3d scanners/printers that can clone atom-by-atom an object.
If you could clone a hardware wallet 1000 times you could brute-force all pins easy peasy.
Once we established that futuristic crazy sci-fi technology breaks pin-based HW the question is how far away we are from that future costwise/technologywise. And it's something we also need to consider if we want to put HW in a cold-storage for 50 years.