Connect with us

Opinion

Insights from Trust Wallet and BNB Chain on Crypto Wallet Security

Published

on


Security of tokens should be the number one priority of all crypto users. Recent incidents such as the DEXX security incident where at least $21 million worth of user funds was lost, are evidence of the inherent risks of the crypto world. In this scenario, attackers compromised over 1000 users by simply taking advantage of the existing shortcomings of the platform’s private key management.

The One Golden Rule of Crypto: Not Your Keys, Not Your Coins

Begin by choosing the right wallet and using the best security practices on offer. There are two types of crypto wallets – Hot wallets, which have internet connectivity and cold wallets, which are stored offline. Apart from these two, there are smart contract wallets which can be programmed.

Now let’s examine BNB Chain and Trust Wallet’s opinion on crypto wallet safety and how users can make informed decisions based on them.

Lessons learnt from the DEXX security Issue.

Before we dive into what crypto wallet security implies, it is necessary that we understand more about the recent security incident mentioned before.

DEXX, which is a reputed on-chain trading terminal platform, experienced an attack on November 16th, 2024, which primarily affected Solana funds. As a result of this attack over $21 million worth of user funds were lost, with about 1000 victim addresses.

The community is concerned after finding out that more than 9000 unauthorized transactions were used in the attack. Subsequent investigations into several compromised addresses found out that the stolen funds remain in the hacker’s possession. This points to the fact that a single offender perpetrated the incident.

The root cause of the incident was identified as vulnerability in the private key storage of the platform’s server. The API for exporting wallets from DEXX returned private, unencrypted keys. This reveals that DEXX stored private keys on its servers. All this, despite branding itself as a non-custodial wallet – what an irony.

Several measures can be taken to prevent this sort of breach.

  • Avoiding Storage of Private Keys: Private keys should never have been stored on DEXX’s servers, as this practice directly contradicts its non-custodial claims.
  • Encryption: Sensitive data should be encrypted during transmission and storage to protect delicate user information.
  • Regular Security Audits: Regular security audits should have been conducted to identify vulnerabilities before they were exploited.

Checking whether selected wallets have gone through proper audits is key for  users. When investing a substantial amount of funds, it’s better to choose reputed and time-tested platforms to decrease the chances of loss.

What to Look for in a Secure Wallet?

Consider the following features when looking for a secure cryptocurrency wallet.

Secure Key Management

Reliable wallets should commit to secure key management. They should ensure that all private keys are generated, stored and managed in the most secure manner possible. Some of the key aspects of secure key management include:

Backup and Recovery: Users should be provided with secure backup options. They should also have the ability to recover private keys or seed phrases when needed.

Seed Phrase Encryption: Ensure that the wallet has strong encryption measures for seed phrases.

Non-custodial design: Go for wallets that do not store their private keys on centralized servers. User should have full control over their private keys.

Wallet History and Security Licenses

Selecting a secure wallet is undoubtedly the most challenging thing a new Web3 user has to do. Many users face difficulties in determining whether a wallet is secure and follows the best practices and protocols.

With that being said, follow these steps to choose a secure wallet.

  • Begin by checking the past records of the wallet and opting for one with a proven history and good reputation. These are likely to follow strict security protocols.
  • Check whether the wallet has passed multiple audits and holds a valid security license.

Follow these above steps to make informed decisions.

Security Scanners and Alerts

Users seldom understand the full implication of a transaction when performing them or exploring dApps. When receiving a given message or prompted transaction from a dApp, it requires a lot of trust from the user’s end. Why? – because its almost impossible to know the full extent of the transaction’s consequences, just by looking at the on-screen prompt.

Fortunately, Trust Wallet’s Security Scanner feature solves this problem. This feature is responsible for analyzing transactions and identifying suspicious patterns, even before the funds are sent. This reduces the chances of users accepting or signing fraudulent or unwanted transactions. This feature alone has safeguarded $450 million from being stolen.

Wallets with this feature simulate the transaction. They then provide the results to the users instead of just displaying the message or the transaction the DApp requests. This ensures that the client’s action is the same as their expectations.

Crypto wallets are known as the gateway to interacting with dApps. But since the users do not fully understand the imitations of transactions, the security scanner feature should be used.

Step-by-Step Guide for Choosing a Wallet

The main tool for interacting with the crypto ecosystem is the crypto wallet. It functions as the gateway to dApps and blockchain networks. This makes choosing the right wallet very important, even if one is trying to play blockchain games as opposed to storing assets or executing transactions.

Before you select a wallet, ask these questions to yourself.

  • Do you want to hold assets long-term or are you simply a day trader?
  • What is the maximum amount of risk you can take?
  • Do you want to engage with dApps, or do you need basic storage or transaction capabilities?

Crypto Wallet Types

Crypto wallets can come in two forms – software wallets and hardware wallets.

Software wallets have to be accessed using smartphones, browsers or computers. Users can conveniently connect with Web3 decentralized applications or get access to their digital assets simply by clicking.

This feature makes them popular among crypto traders. The main advantage of software wallets is the level of functionality and immediate accessibility they provide. They are versatile, capable of connecting to dApps seamlessly and be used for use cases such as crypto payments and digital IDs.

A good example of a software wallet is Trust Wallet. It is compatible with both desktops and mobile devices. 

When using a hot wallet on your PC or mobile, it’s crucial to install antivirus software for malware protection to ensure the security of your personal computer or phone. Hardware wallets on the other hand are physical devices used to store private keys in an offline environment. They are considered the safest option for crypto management and storage for this reason. It stores private keys away from internet connectivity.

Hardware wallets are ideal for users who prefer an extra layer of physical security or wish to store their crypto assets without frequent transactions. They are also suited for those who like to store their crypto long-term. However, the trade-off is not convenient, as things like transaction execution can take longer.

Can hardware and software wallets be used simultaneously?

It is possible to use hardware and software wallets at the same time. You can connect Ledger, which is a hardware wallet to Trust Wallet’s( software wallet) browser extension feature.

Are smart contract wallets safe?

Smart contract wallets use smart contracts that can function as wallets and provide features such as signature validation, asset ownership, and execution. Most use the ERC-4337 industry standard to develop a smart contract wallet even though other methods exist.

Smart contract wallets can bolster security and usability compared to traditional wallets. With smart contract wallets, users can get multi-owner accounts, flexible key management, token gas payments, account recovery, batch transactions, and advanced UX with security audits.

Conclusion

The world of cryptocurrency has both potential rewards and inherent risks. The key here is to stay informed and secure. Prioritize security by choosing wallets that can provide the above-mentioned features. Remember, it’s essential to make well-informed decisions and understand your needs before you choose a particular type of wallet.

Lastly, security is a personal thing. Stay vigilant, avoid sharing personal information and use different storage methods.

Disclaimer: This article is an opinion piece. The content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market conditions. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.



Source link

21 Million

No, BlackRock Can't Change Bitcoin

Published

on


Recently, BlackRock released an educational video explaining Bitcoin, which I thought was great—it’s amazing to see Bitcoin being discussed on such a massive platform. But, of course, Bitcoin X (Twitter) had a meltdown over one specific line in the video: “There is no guarantee that Bitcoin’s 21 million supply cap will not be changed.”

HealthRnager from Natural News claimed, “Bitcoin has become far too centralized, and now the wrong people largely control its algorithms. They are TELLING you in advance what they plan to do.”

Now, let me be clear: this is total nonsense. The controversy is overhyped, and the idea that BlackRock would—or even could—change bitcoin’s supply is laughable. The statement in their video is technically true, but it’s just a legal disclaimer. It doesn’t mean BlackRock is plotting to inflate bitcoin’s supply. And even if they were, they don’t have the power to pull it off.

Bitcoin’s 21 million cap is fundamental—it’s not up for debate. The entire Bitcoin ecosystem—miners, developers, and nodes—operates on this core principle. Without it, Bitcoin wouldn’t be Bitcoin. And while BlackRock is a financial giant and holds over 500,000 Bitcoin for its ETF, its influence over Bitcoin is practically nonexistent.

Bitcoin is a proof-of-work (PoW) system, not a proof-of-stake (PoS) system. It doesn’t matter how much bitcoin BlackRock owns; economic nodes hold the real power.

Let’s play devil’s advocate for a second. Say BlackRock tries to propose a protocol change to increase bitcoin’s supply. What happens? The vast network of nodes would simply reject it. Bitcoin’s history proves this. Remember Roger Ver and the Bitcoin Cash fork? He had significant influence and holdings, yet his version of bitcoin became irrelevant because the majority of economic actors didn’t follow him.

If Bitcoin could be controlled by a single entity like BlackRock, it would’ve failed a long time ago. The U.S. government, with its endless money printer, could easily acquire 10% of the supply if that’s all it took to control Bitcoin. But that’s not how Bitcoin works. Its decentralized nature ensures no single entity—no matter how powerful—can dictate its terms.

So, stop worrying about BlackRock “changing” Bitcoin. Their influence has hard limits. Even if they tried to push developers to change the protocol, nodes would reject it. Bitcoin’s decentralization is its greatest strength, and no one—not BlackRock, not Michael Saylor—can change that.

This article is a Take. Opinions expressed are entirely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.



Source link

Continue Reading

Opinion

It’s Time to Admit It – There Are Only 2.1 Quadrillion Bitcoins

Published

on


If the above statement offends you, you might not have read the Bitcoin source code.

Follow Rizzo on X.

https://x.com/pete_rizzo_/

Of course, I’m sure you’ve heard that there are 21 million bitcoin – and this is true, the Bitcoin protocol allows for only “21 million bitcoin” to be created, yet these larger denominations can be subdivided into 100 million sub-units each.

Call them whatever you want, there are only 2.1 quadrillion monetary units in the protocol.

This dollars and cents differential has long been the subject of debate – in the time of Satoshi, Bitcoin’s creator, the dual conventions, Bitcoin having both a bulk denomination, and a smaller unit, was not much of a concern. There were questions about whether the software would work at all, and bitcoin were so worthless, selling them in bulk was the only rational option.

Rehashing this debate is BIP 21Q, a proposal to the Bitcoin users authored by John Carvalho, founder of Synonym, creator of the Pubky social media platform, and a tenured contributor whose work dates back to the days of the influential Bitcoin-assets collective.

In short, the BIP proposes that network actors – the various wallets and exchanges – change how Bitcoin denominations are displayed, with the smallest unit of the protocol renamed “bitcoins,” as opposed to “satoshis,” as they have been commonly called.

Here are the specifics of the BIP:

Redefinition of the Unit:

  • Internally, the smallest indivisible unit remains unchanged.
  • Historically, 1 BTC = 100,000,000 base units. Under this proposal, “1 bitcoin” equals that smallest unit.
  • What was previously referred to as “1 BTC” now corresponds to 100 million bitcoins under the new definition.

Terminology:

  • The informal terms “satoshi” or “sat” are deprecated.
  • All references, interfaces, and documentation SHOULD refer to the base integer unit simply as “bitcoin.”

Display and Formatting:

  • Applications SHOULD present values as whole integers without decimals.
  • Example:
    • Old display: 0.00010000 BTC
    • New display: 10000 BTC (or ₿10000)

Unsurprisingly, the debate around the BIP has been hostile. For one, it’s not a technical BIP, though this is not a requirement of the BIP process. Suffice to say, it’s perhaps the most general BIP that has been proposed under the BIP process to date, as it mainly deals with market conventions and user onboarding logic, not any changes to the software rules.

However, I have to say, I find the proposal compelling. Nik Hoffman, our News Editor, does not, preferring to stick to the market affirmative.

Yet, I think the proposal raises relevant questions: why should new users be forced to compute their Bitcoin balances using only decimals? Surely this has the adverse side effect of making commerce difficult – it’s simply antithetical to how people think and act today.

Also, in terms of savings, at an $100,000 BTC price, it isn’t exactly compelling to think you could be spending a whole year earning 1 BTC, though that may be.

Indeed, there have been various debates for all kinds of units – mBTC, uBTC – that play around with the dollars and cents convention, but Carvalho here is wisely skipping to the end, preferring just to rip the band-aid off. $1 would buy 1,000 bitcoins under his proposal.

What’s to like here, and I argued this during a Lugano debate on the topic in 2023, is that it keeps both the larger BTC denomination and the smaller unit, now bitcoins. They are both important, and serve different functions.

My argument then was that having a larger denomination like BTC (100 million bitcoins) is important. If there was no “BTC unit,” the press and financial media would be faced to reckon that “1 bitcoin” is still worth less than 1 cent. 

How much mainstream coverage and interest do we think there would be? I’d bet not very much.

In this way, BIP 21Q is a best-of-both-worlds approach.

The financial world, press, and media can continue championing the meteoric rise in value of “BTC,” while everyday users can get rid of decimals and complex calculations, trading the only real Bitcoin unit guaranteed to exist in perpetuity. 

This article is a Take. Opinions expressed are entirely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.



Source link

Continue Reading

Bitcoin spot ETF

We Need In-Kind Redemptions For The Spot Bitcoin ETFs

Published

on


Follow Frank on X.

On a recent episode of the Coinage podcast, guest SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce said that she is open to reconsidering in-kind redemptions for spot bitcoin ETFs.

(For those who aren’t familiar with the term “in-kind redemption,” it refers to the ability to withdraw the bitcoin you’ve purchased via an ETF into your own custody. In essence, it turns a bitcoin IOU into the real thing.)

This makes my heart happy, as bitcoin wasn’t designed to exist trapped within the wrappers of the old system. It was built to set us free from that system.

If Peirce can work with the incoming SEC Chair, Paul Atkins, to facilitate the approval of in-kind redemptions then the spot bitcoin ETFs can serve as some of the biggest on-ramps to Bitcoin, as Bitwise co-founder Hong Kim put it, as opposed to simply existing as speculation vehicles.

Bitcoin was born to exist in the wild. It wasn’t born to exist in a Wall Street zoo.

In-kind redemptions would allow the bitcoin currently trapped within the zoo the ability to return to its natural habitat.

This article is a Take. Opinions expressed are entirely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement [ethereumads]

Trending

    wpChatIcon