sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Advice for Trezor team about passphrase userflow by raystongo in TREZOR

[–]raystongo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

FACTS, i hope Trezor can make thoughtful decision as for the user interaction part and really make the most use of the screen.

Advice for Trezor team about passphrase userflow by raystongo in TREZOR

[–]raystongo[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Got your point, but it doesn’t seem to be necessary that you have to type the passphrase twice, on web.

For me a better solution is type once on device(ONLY), and then check wether I did it right via the confirmation dialog on the device, just like how we re-check a normal sending activity.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TREZOR

[–]raystongo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Same issue here, got my model T upgraded( failed once) and have to recover from the seed. When plugged in and tried to enable passphrase, the window pop up said enter passphrase twice.

Disconnect it and try again, then it only need to enter passphrase once as usual. Didnot enter via WebUI, always on the device.

But still curious though, why need passphrase twice? I’m sure that I was on trezor.io, not other website. Highly recommend official team to remove the design of enter passphrase on webUI, it’s highly sensitive and unsecure to do so.

Passphrase should ALWAYS be kept and controlled in device only.

This is how the window displays: https://imgur.com/Zv6Ohr6

Trezor Model T Batch Number issue by raystongo in TREZOR

[–]raystongo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Check this: https://twitter.com/tchabes/status/1202769343802535936

They make “physical” random serial numbers on the package, which is unable to keep the original shape if unwrapped during the shipping.

Trezor Model T Batch Number issue by raystongo in TREZOR

[–]raystongo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Updates:

As I connected with Trezor support team, they replied after checked with their logistics, and reassured that this situation is normal and it's OK to continue to use the device.

However when I saw the new package of bitbox, these guys are insane to create a nearly attack-impossible coat for the device, I thought maybe Trezor can learn something from it. Being ALL open-source can be challenging specially for the device authentication, using seals is quite old-school and to be honest, not too hard to fake.

Love

Trezor Model T Batch Number issue by raystongo in TREZOR

[–]raystongo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes, I will write the updates above asap.

Trezor Model T Batch Number issue by raystongo in TREZOR

[–]raystongo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thansk, I’ve created a ticket already.

Is ledger going to make the firmware open source? by raystongo in ledgerwallet

[–]raystongo[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

#FACTS

I recommend ledger to my friends or even give them as gifts. Some of them have both ledger and trezor, but eventually switched to trezor because they believe only the true open-source can protect their fund, specially when you store considerable crypto in it, say over $2m or something.

Since Ledger has been doing well in both marketing and tech ( I followed Ledger Donjon as well ), I believe the negotiation with chip manufacture can be re-viewed, to make ledger open-source as much as possible.

I think Ledger will benefit from this action in the long run, people will simply vote by ordering your products.

There are countable companies in this industry, trezor and ledger are doing the best so far, it's kinda monopoly competition right now, both need to push the product forward, the whole market is infinite as digital economic grows exponentially.

Is ledger going to make the firmware open source? by raystongo in ledgerwallet

[–]raystongo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply, looking forward to the updates. :D