What are the reasons for not using a multisignature setup? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

What are the reasons for not using a multisignature setup?

639 sats \ 25 comments \ @aliceandthewonderland 25 Oct bitcoin_beginners

as title says,

What holds you back from setting up a multisig wallet?

I'm aware that setting up a multisig wallet can raise some concerns especially for individual coiner, such as managing multiple public keys. but it gives the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks.

I know that one of the concerns people have about multisig wallets is that they need to back up all the public keys. but this can be easily managed by exporting the setup as a BSMS descriptor if you use nunchuck or sparrow wallet, which contains the key spec along with the derivation path. Even if your wallet doesn't support the BSMS format, you can simply open the file in a text editor like Notepad and copy and paste the xpub information. This way, it makes you only need to handle a single file.

i admit that I'm a bit paranoid, and I am still worring too much about brute forcing. But even in case someone accidentally finds out one of your private keys by brute forcing, multisig wallet uses a script, you need to co-sign with the required number of keys in order to spend funds. they would still need to spend an enormous amount of time and resources to brute-force the rest of the keys.

As most of you are probably stacking sats, it's likely that one day your stack will become a significant portion of your life savings. When that time comes, you'll probably want to consider setting up a multisig wallet for added security anyway. So, why not study and set it up early, rather than waiting until it's too late? It's always better to be prepared and have a secure setup in place.

any thoughts on this?

view all related items

96 sats \ 4 replies \ @kruw 25 Oct

Multisig is useless for most people because they don't own multiple geographically separated properties to store each key. Having 2 of 3 keys doesn't make any opsec difference if all the keys are located in the same place.

141 sats \ 0 replies \ @aliceandthewonderland OP 25 Oct

Multisig is useless for most people because they don't own multiple geographically separated properties to store each key. Having 2 of 3 keys doesn't make any opsec difference if all the keys are located in the same place.

i agreee, it is a valid concern about the practicality of multisig setups for individuals who don't have multiple geographically separated properties to store each key. However, even if all devices are stored in the same location, using 3 different vendors for multisig still safeguards against a catastrophic failure of a single vendor, protecting your life savings from being lost due to a vendor-specific vulnerability or compromise.

101 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 25 Oct

Which aligns with level of wealth doesn't it.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kruw 25 Oct

Sort of. I would use multisig if I had over 1 BTC, but 1 BTC doesn't buy you even one decent property of the required 3 properties.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @02a9a61fdc 6 Nov

You don´t necessarily need three properties. Geographical distribution could also look like this:

one key in your desk
one key burried in the backyard
one key at your sisters house

Technically this is geographically distributed, and still better than all keys in the same drawer.

87 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 25 Oct

One reason is that a multisig address stands out and therefore might not be best for people who prioritize privacy.

Taproot has meant to have changed that, but I haven't seen multisig implemented until very recently Bitbox + Liana.

A strong passphrase is like a 2/2 multisig and it blends in well with single sig addresses. It's also good for creating decoy wallets in case of the so called $5 wrench attack.

57 sats \ 4 replies \ @jgbtc 25 Oct

My problem is, what to do with the three seeds (assuming 3/2 multisig). I don't know anyone I trust and I don't trust a bank safety deposit box either. If all 3 seeds are sitting in a safe in my house, it's the same as single sig. Any suggestions?

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 25 Oct

You could try collaborative custody, even if a safe deposit box isn't perfect. There are probably no perfect solutions.

keep in mind the greatest loss of funds is due to overcomplication, 'locking yourself out', followed by phishing attacks through text messages and emails usually at random asking for 'private keys' to 'update your wallet' and stupid stuff.

If you do go down the multisig route... don't forget to back up your xpubs.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @zapsammy 25 Oct

if u cannot trust anyone in ur life, that is a sad state of existence. bitcoin won't fix that... only thou can fix that.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @jgbtc 25 Oct

There are plenty of people in my life that I have total and complete trust in, but they mostly live in my house since they are my wife and kids. And there are others outside of immediate family I would trust with a whole range of things, including my life, but they don't understand Bitcoin or the importance of something like a metal plate with seed words stamped on it. Sure I can try to explain this to them but I don't think I can count on them to keep this secure and not lose it, potentially for decades. Unfortunately no potential candidate has the knowledge and appreciation of Bitcoin for me to feel confident asking them to take on this responsibility. I also think it's important to consider the gravity of what's being asked. Someday men from the government may show up at their door with guns and demand they hand it over. I have the decency to consider this possibility and factor that into who I would ask to keep this for me. Yes, nobody I know meets these criteria. But anyway, your condescending and insulting assumption is really appreciated.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @zapsammy 25 Oct

I don't know anyone I trust

my bad, apparently u do have people in ur life that u can trust. i will go out on a limb and assume that in a difficult situation they can pick up a book and follow a handful of instructions.

information is abundant, i can no longer tolerate ignorance. easy-going days are over, we're heading into deep chaos.

200 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 25 Oct

Common use of multisig makes us all safer. Your effort toward security should scale with the value of what you're storing. This question is good to ask to help improve multisig ux but don't let this thread deter you.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 25 Oct

managing multiple public keys

I think you mean private keys.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @aliceandthewonderland OP 25 Oct

no, i meant xpubs. in 2-of-3 multisig setup for instance, each device needs all three xpubs to derive the multisig addresses.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @realBitcoinDog 25 Oct

The biggest reason people don’t do it is for fear of testing their setup.

I faced my fears and published this guide in Bitcoin Magazine!

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/testing-your-bitcoin-custody-setup

0 sats \ 6 replies \ @DarthCoin 25 Oct

Multisig primarily use case is for companies, where are more than one individual managing the company's funds.

For a simple stacker, even that is stashing large amounts, multisig is just adding more complexity for nothing to gain. You use multisig because you are not trusting yourself and your skills.

As I said multiple times: use the 3 levels stashing and on each level add multiple methods and wallets.

Base level HODL - large amounts, in cold simple wallets, not just one but multiple ones and with multiples good UTXOs. These wallets you do not touch them, are for long term, you only deposit through an xpub.

Medium level CACHE - where you have all IN / OUT txs, coin control, swaps, LN nodes and managing destinations (HODL and SPEND). Here you stash medium amount, in multiple wallets (desktop or mobile).

Top level SPEND - where you keep small amounts in mobile LN wallets, enough for spending in your day to day life.

More explained here: https://darth-coin.github.io/beginner/be-your-own-bank-en.html

btw here is an example of one my cold wallets:

111 sats \ 5 replies \ @aliceandthewonderland OP 25 Oct

I get your point, but single sig is basically leaving a single point of failure, and this is a fact even with strong passphrases - an intruder can brute-force a passphrase within a week or a month. Having a multisig, along with geographically dispersed signers, gives you much stronger attack surfaces. In this way, it'd provide the security of being your own bank.

10 sats \ 4 replies \ @DarthCoin 25 Oct

be my guest brute forcing that image.

single point of failure

Wrong. As I said, use multiple wallets NOT just one with all your stash. Using a single wallet is really dumb.

See the 12 peaks in this image? Each one contain a word. Good luck finding them. And no multisig used. Just simple 12 words.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @aliceandthewonderland OP 25 Oct

that seems challenging tho. will use chatgpt to find out brute forcing the image.

20 sats \ 2 replies \ @DarthCoin 25 Oct

will use chatgpt

No wonder why you use multisig... Do you use shitGPT also to ask how to fry an egg?

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @aliceandthewonderland OP 25 Oct

shitGPT

that's funny

I appreciate you sharing the link "https://darth-coin.github.io/beginner/be-your-own-bank-en.html". will definitely take a look to gain more insight.

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 25 Oct

Is not funny. Is true and is really sad that people fall for this crap.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @ek 25 Oct

I use multisig with this template that I created.

The printed QR codes of the xpubs leak privacy to printers but that was something I was worth risking for higher convenience of QR codes and being sure that they were correctly recorded. (You should still manually verify that you can recover this wallet before you deposit into it.)

100 sats \ 1 reply \ @pillar 25 Oct

Bitcoin storage driven by Latex.

That's one weird ass crossover.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 25 Oct