Our final post in this week's security series is a big one: why screens aren't all they're cracked up to be, why we think they keep people from self-custody, & how Bitkey can help without a screen on the hardware. Take a read, let us know what you think: https://bitkey.build/screens-are-not-a-panacea/
Discussion
Does this device have its own software wallet? What is the digital interface with the network?
You can read more about it at bitkey.build
This post describes how it works https://bitkey.build/how-the-wallet-works/
Sounds interesting. The recovery seed seems to be the outlying issue to solve. In my personal opinion this is something that should be consequential. You can not call up bitcoin and ask about your Bitcoins, You can not defraud the bitcoin network by asking for a refund. You actually have to take responsibility for your money, Or you loose it. Seems pretty cut and dry otherwise. Cool idea.
I'm sorry but their solution to trust a Bitkey server is laughable.
I’d love to see a video of the process when using. I previously had the chance to inspect the physical device and it felt very premium in the hand.
I will need to re-read this to fully digest. My first thoughts are:
(1) Could this be “hacked” between the server and end user in a similar fashion as you outlined with other methods.
(2) What risks are there to the end user if the server itself is hacked?
Great questions.
On (1): the phone can't modify information signed by the hardware, it just forwards it to the server. Bitkey hardware ships with a key (not the one used for signing transactions) that can be used to sign messages and which Bitkey servers can verify. If a compromised phone attempts to modify what the hardware has signed, the server would know they've been tampered with and would be able to surface that to the user via a channel like email.
On (2): if the Bitkey servers that communicate the addresses or transaction details to you in the proposed solution were compromised, what they show/send you wouldn't match your phone's screen.
Thanks max.
What information about me would be held on the server?
In regard to feedback, I agree with the reasoning behind leaving out screens on the wallet hardware, but separately, on a very simple level, I always feel uncomfortable with third party servers and web services getting involved. I have no problem with optional offers, but I find the dependence on physically remote hardware, aside from the BTC network infrastructure itself, just an unpleasant notion, regardless of how intricate the logic of its integration. Self custody should look and feel self contained. The whole point lies in setting myself up in a way where no one else gets the chance to patronize me in my decisions.
On the hardware side I would still care to see that exemplified too by a seamless, portless enclosure with MagSafe, Qi2 charging.
Rockey!!🪨💜 
