Trezor Safe 7 is the first "quantum-ready" hardware wallet.
But what does that mean? According to Trezor official documentation:
> A 'quantum ready' device is a device which will be able to run post-quantum cryptographic updates.
In other words, in case quantum computing becomes a real threat able to break elliptic curve cryptography, which would allow bad actors to sign fake firmware, users will still be able to update the real firmware and verify its integrity and authenticity because Trezor firmware is signed with a post-quantum signing algorithm. That's pretty much all.
Does it mean that your money will be safe? No. In case elliptic curve cryptography is broken, the Bitcoin (or your shitcoin) protocol must be updated to support some post-quantum cryptography signing scheme first, but even in that scenario I'm pretty sure your Trezor Safe 7 will not help you much. Basically, because nobody can predict the future and design a solution for a scenario that is completely hypothetical. But there are also some more concrete technical reasons. For example, the new TropicSquare's secure element TROPIC01 (core element in Trezor Safe 7 architecture) is not a post-quantum cryptographic coprocessor, but it is highly specialized in elliptic curve cryptography and 256-bit hash algorithms.
It could sound like something that is easy to implement and looks awesome in the product's brochure—a pure marketing move to catch the attention of uneducated buyers. I think there is something of that for sure, but it is also true that it comes with some benefits:
* In case Ed25519 is one day broken, even when quantum computing is not a reality, Trezor would have a safe way to update its firmware
* In case quantum computers break elliptic curve cryptography and a Bitcoin update is deployed, Trezor could come with firmware that helps us move funds or gain time
* It starts implementing post-quantum technology in the Bitcoin ecosystem and pushes competing products to implement new cryptographic technologies
The question then is: are users better with or without that feature? Well, they are not worse off than before and they have some very small benefits in a highly hypothetical scenario, but if we take into account that a hardware wallet is something that should be designed to last for many years, then I think it is a net positive. Tiny, but positive.
When will Trezor Safe 7 be supported by Wasabi?
The Trezor firmware team is working on that. The plan is to implement the needed changes in Electrum Wallet first and then add support in the Bitcoin Core HWI project, which Wasabi Wallet depends on.
There is a small challenge in the technical details because Trezor THP (Trezor Host Protocol) encrypts communication, which requires a handshake (key exchange) and then uses the key for the whole session. There's also a nonce that increments after every message on both sides (Trezor and Host) and needs to be kept in sync.
Currently, HWI is stateless and does a good job abstracting all the different details in terms of API calls and communication protocols. This means that delegating or leaking the session and nonce details to the host would break the smooth HWI API. So it seems the session could be handled by HWI itself.
Gold is also finite and has required an unimaginable amount of energy to synthesize it.
120,000 fresh bitcoins and 2 million bitcoins liquidity in 5 months. Impressive.
Source:
https://coinjoin-stats.github.io/www/nightly/wasabi2/wasabi2.htmlI'm not sure I agree with all the points, but the article is a must-read:
View quoted note →I reported a double-spending bug in Cashu, and they asked me not to disclose it for one year.
Floppy found a DoS vector, received a grant for it, and gave them how much time? Two weeks? Not happy with that, they threatened to attack the mints. What attracts these kind of psycos to the FOSS circles?
By the way, the document that explained how you would own nothing and rent everything from the owners of everything has disappeared.
Does anyone have it?
View quoted note →
Two weeks ago I attended the presentation of SatoshiLab's latest hardware wallet, the Trezor Safe 7, and I will be sharing random thoughts. Here the first one:
SLIP39 (Shamir Secret Sharing or multishare backup).
In 2013, Trezor founders pushed the first draft for what became known as BIP39, a way to encode binary data in a human-readable format as a simple list of words. For context, at that time HD wallets didn't exist yet—or at least I don't recall any—and backing up your Bitcoin wallet meant simply making copies of your wallet files. While BIP39 is just an encoding mechanism that could theoretically encode any binary data, in practice it's used to encode the master seed for hierarchical deterministic wallets.
The first hardware wallets had only two buttons and very limited displays, so they needed a user-friendly mechanism to allow users to back up their seeds. BIP39 was perfect for this, and I believe—though I could be wrong—that this was the main goal of the BIP. Regardless, BIP39 was massively adopted, and currently every wallet I know of uses it, whether software or hardware.
As a wallet developer, I know that backing up wallets is perhaps the first and most important thing to implement, and also one of the most difficult, because there's no standard for saving metadata. The only thing that really works and is interoperable is BIP39.
Now SatoshiLabs has decided to make SLIP39 the default backup mechanism for the Trezor Safe 7, which surprised me. While I believe this is the right decision and SLIP39 is more flexible and generally superior, moving away from the most widely-used backup technology in the entire crypto space requires a level of courage that's somewhat unusual.
Disclaimer: I implemented SLIP39 in Wasabi Wallet with financial assistance from SatoshiLabs via a grant. While I would have implemented it regardless because it's been on my wish list for years, the grant certainly made it easier. I'll be making Wasabi use SLIP39 by default soon as well.
Analysis of input-output mappings in coinjoin
transactions with arbitrary values
Please read:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2510.17284These Meatups in Córdoba are going deeper and deeper.
The IA-generated Michael Saylor conference talks are taking scams to a new high level.
Saint Thomas Aquinas, 800 years ago:
There is no such a thing as a store of value.
f "any" peace is better than any war, why does nobody accept being invaded, robbed, or humiliated when the alternative—war—could be worse? Why do humans consistently opt for the worse option then? It seems that everybody knows that war is the worst thing ever and peace is the best thing ever, and yet peace is always interrupted by war. But why? Because the premise is not true. Many wars are preferable to many forms of peace, because some peace arrangements are unacceptable and some wars are simply too tempting.
View quoted note →How perverse must the ideas of CBDCs and digital IDs be that not even the ideologues behind Agenda 2030 have dared to include them among their list of objectives that the devil wants to accomplish for this decade.
De los creadores de "La lucha de clases", llega "La lucha de generaciones".
View quoted note →Pretending to be a good person is easier, and much cheaper than doing good; you just need to criticize those doing real good for not doing it well enough.
