/biz/ - Business & Finance

Nano s fagget

>>17044146
I like my nano S but I've been waiting for the X to drop in price.

>>17044230
the nano x was my first choice

I use MEWConnect on iOS, make my own symmetric encryption for my phrases and only access to wallet on a bootable usb (Ubuntu) . Is my funds safu?

With the increase in crypto currency adoption there is a need of secure internet service which will be probably based on decentralised technology one such exciting project is Tachyon protocol they have interesting products in internet service provider segment with advanced security for data protection in modern era of crypto currency I think we need such unique projects to safe guard our digital assets.

>>17044146
Certainly not Trezor.

>>17044230
>>17044248
Fucking brainlets, why THE FUCK would you choose a wireless connection over a wired connection with something like a wallet, seriously how fucking stupid are you

>>17045036
link ?

>>17045096
https://twitter.com/krakenfx/status/1223253508956266496

>>17044146
nano s >= trezor > paper wallet > smartphone wallet > the rest > paper wallet with no computer science background > brain(let) wallet

>>17045036
Ledger not affected.
https://twitter.com/Ledger/status/1223261643913732096

>>17044230
I have both and I prefer the nano s. It's just more convenient to use

>>17045096
Yes buy LINK

>>17045963
>ahh lemme boot my laptop (not sure if it was infected when i wasnt home) enter my long encryption password (if not there is no meaning) and put my unsigned transaction and sign it and then transfer it to usb and broadcast it

>>17045327
yeah it has a secure element that is used in credit cards, passports etc.

>>17045981
holy shit you're retarded. you're never going to make it

>>17045989
kys offlinelaptopwalletfag

>>17046113
you're never ever going to make it.

paper is hardware

coolwallet S obviously

>>17045036
i have been saying this for years and been called everything under the sun. hardware wallets don't add security they decrease it they are a physical attack vector. even ledger. doesn't matter if it's a "secure chip" just makes the attack more expensive.

the only way to actually secure your secret is with high entropy ie a strong passphrase. pins and other soft protection are all snake oil bullshit.

trezors default security model is still better than ledgers tho. because you can naturally use a strong passphrase. it just takes forever to type in on 2 fucking buttons lol.

>>17045988
only costs about $50k in equipment to break it. paid once used on as many chips as you want. each attack has a few dollar cost per chip on consumables but that's literally nothing.

ledger is also crap don't be reassured.

>>17046293
https://support.ledger.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005214529-Advanced-passphrase-security

ledger also has passphrase option.

>if it's a "secure chip" just makes the attack more expensive.

if the attacker is NSA yes.

>>17046293
should i even bother using my trezor anymore? what best way to migrate to something more secure?

>>17046306
source?

>>17046312
weird when did they add that?
>>17046320
just use paper wallets. your goal should be cost effective secure redundancy.
you achieve that by using bip38 encrypted paper wallets and store them at multiple locations both physically and digitally.

hardware wallets are good against online hacks on hot wallets. they need physical access to become a vulnerability. they are the fucking worst for cold store.

>>17045053
bluetooth is just a communication protocol... it doesn't make your private keys flow through the air

>>17046406
Say what you want its a weakpoint, they could somehow swich adresses when you send transactions or something, cable is safer

>>17046689
attackers can forge transactions no matter what you connect your device with. you verify the addresses on the device's screen before signing

>>17046826
T. Bluetooth hacker

>>17046352
>And digitally
Your so fucking dumb if you would upload your private keys to anything that could connect to the internet.
Also if you use a paper wallet you cannot spend any funds without burning your private key and require the generation of a new one, hardware wallets let you transact without exposing your private key

>>17046689
>>17046960
you're either boomer or technologically illiterate

>>17047157
No u

>>17045053
you are literally the brainlet.
i only use it wired with the supplied wire.
as anon said - its just a communication protocol - nothing else. dont be a mongoloid

>>17047145
>Your so fucking dumb if you would upload your private keys to anything that could connect to the internet.
i uploaded them to 4chan a couple of times.

>>17047269
Don't waste your breath, 99% of people on here know nothing. He doesn't even know what bip38 means.

>>17046689
>>17047180

dude you're actually retarded im sorry to inform you

I just bought a Trezor. It's all I could afford, new to crypto. I just wanted to keep my moola off of an online wallet. How fucked am I?

>>17047338
you're okay as long as no attacker gets physical access to your trezor. also i recommend using a passphrase to access it, not just a pin.

>>17047338
You are fine, if your a shutin autist. If not just have a designated room and setup you are familiar with that has the least access from other people, and a good place to hide the backup seed phrase too

>>17047396
I'll definitely change it to a passphrase.
>>17047435
>You are fine, if your a shutin autist
Okay, I'm all good then.

Thanks frens.

Having bluetooth on your wallet is like having your wallet plugged into every computer within a 20 foot. Sure it's "safe" but its absolutely unnecessary and retarded. One more attack vector and now WHEN an exploit is found they can abuse it through a fucking physical wall.

>>17047396
>>17047464
good again remember: only a strong passphrase at least 20 characters preferably 25 or more gives you actual cryptographic security.

you can also use shamirs in your backup scheme if you are afraid you would forget your passphrase. with shamirs you can control how many pieces someone needs to reconstruct your secret and can achieve secure redundancy also inheritance.

>>17044230
Yes
>>17045036
Yes ( https://chainbulletin.com/kraken-discovers-critical-flaw-in-trezor-hardware-wallets-trezor-responds/ )
>>17045327
Yes
>>17046826
Yes

>>17044146
Piece of paper

>>17044146
how do large valuable teams link chainlink secure their wallets?

>>17047544
it really depends on the hardware design if bluetooth can be exploited or not. possible theoretically as a blanket term yeah likely? no unless the designers went full retard. physical access to your device however pretty much renders all soft protection (ie programmed behavior) worthless.

my major issue with hardware wallets is what can make your coins secure on them has nothing to do with hardware wallets.

but like i said for a hot spend wallet they are actually decent because purely cyber attacks like malware or online hacks will not penetrate them.

the only problem is they are advertised as useful/good idea for cold wallets and providing adequate security without a rudimentary understanding of the security model and cryptography involved. this is the disingenuity of the hardware wallet makers. fucking disgusting.

also the only thing i don't get about this whole shit is why no exchange implemented bip38 swipe yet? i was pretty sure it will be implemented by 2020.
it's easy as fuck open standard, there are plenty opensource implementations if you can't trust your exchange for security you wouldn't send bitcoins to them to begin with...

you could just open up your secure paper wallets directly on the exchange when you want to cash out or convert it to an other crypto... fucking lazy ass niggers.

>>17045327
I always trust companies that claim they are secure!