[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 124 KB, 750x761, D6yp0P-XYAANdjf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13699869 No.13699869 [Reply] [Original]

Are BTC multisig wallets strictly more secure than standard ones? Or is there some black swan risk that could break multisig while somehow singlesig wallets are unaffected? I ask this with the ETH Parity multisig vulnerability in mind. I don't understand the details of that. I just know that holding ETH using the supposedly more secure multisig solution ended up being unsafe. Do the technical details make BTC multisig immune to this risk, or could something similar happen?

>> No.13700084

bump

>> No.13700300

bump

>> No.13700344

>>13699869
>>13700084
>>13700300
Shut up.

>> No.13700363

Pros: theoretically more secure because you can physically separate them for security or have a second person involved.

Cons: you're doubling your risk factor of losing ascess to the wallet long term. More keys and seeds.

>> No.13700421

>>13700363
what this guy said
also worth noting that key sharing schemes are great for legal inheritance.
for example 2 out of 3 multisig:
1st pk is your hot wallet pk protected by password
2nd pk is the signatory service (or hardware wallet not so great)
3rd pk is the backup key (paper wallet in a safe deposit box)

any on key is worthless in itself when you die your 1st key is lost but the 3rd key gets inherited and with a legal certificate of inheritance the signatory service will sign for moving the funds to a new wallet.

>> No.13700530
File: 190 KB, 1101x1151, bitcoin-log-log.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13700530

>>13699869
remember anons
remember
22 of may
bitcoin pizza day
10000 coins for 2 pizza
$50 million today