No, I meant the manufacturer. It’s only fair, and a benefit to the community at large. If it’s ignored, it’s a clear signal - no?
Discussion
I have no interest in being a free consultant for Coinkite, which is:
- actively selling users what in my opinion is subpar hardware
- had multiple chances to fix similar issues previously
- and is actively perpetrating attacks against OSS projects and competitors
If/when I do end up making a full write-up on possible supply chain attacks on a Coldcard along with a demo, they can figure out how to fix it themselves.
They have for example bitched at nostr:npub1s0vtkgej33n7ec4d7ycxmwt78up8hpfa30d0yfksrshq7t82mchqynpq6j for forking their OSS, permissively licensed code for their HWW (which looks nothing like a Coldcard) while CC is a Trezor fork (they stripped out the branding too)
They have issued trademark takedown requests to nostr:npub1k5f85zx0xdskyayqpfpc0zq6n7vwqjuuxugkayk72fgynp34cs3qfcvqg2's BTClock for being “too similar” to Blockclock, even though BTClock has been used by someone that is on Nostr for years before Blockclock.
NVK has for years bashed SeedSigner on baseless claims for the sole purpose of promoting his own product in bad faith.
The following is speculation but likely: they may have also pressured and/or influenced Bitcoin influencers and the rest of the OpenSats board to reject grants relating to SeedSigner.
