bitbuds on Nostr: Alright here’s the relevancy. I’ll try to walk you through an example. I install ...

Alright here’s the relevancy. I’ll try to walk you through an example.

I install a RAT (backdoor) using a zero click exploit from a spam text or email. You have no knowledge anything happened and delete the spam. My exploit installs a logger that grabs your key next time you send a transaction and delivers the key back to my server. Suddenly your money is gone and don’t know how.

With a hww what I described above is impossible. When signing a transaction the key is never exposed to the internet connected device. Your model is no better than a hot wallet, because it is by definition a hot wallet. This is the core reason hww are more secure. Signing transactions from cold storage is how many of us have been using bitcoin for years.

Just because nothing bad that you know of hasn’t happened doesn’t make it a good idea to recommend taking the risk. If the vulnerability exists then why bother? Just use the safer option.

Your previous reply highlights a misunderstanding of the term “cold wallet”. It’s defined as a wallet living on a device INCAPABLE of an internet connection. If your keys are on a device that can connect to the internet, in any way, it is by definition a hot wallet.

At this point I’ve led you to the water my friend, it’s up to you to drink. Read up on the history of hww development and I believe you’ll have a better understanding.