Re: Verifiable builds need attention. Only 3 of 68 Android wallets are verifiable
Interesting to see that no wallet has ever been audited and only few of them are reproducible, but I doubt if any information from this website is really accurate and I don't see any hardware wallet listed.
You have Bluewallet listed as Custodial, and it is clear that this is non-custodial open source wallet, and there is no provider that holds the coins.
This is probably one of the best Bitcoin mobile wallets today.
github:
https://github.com/bluewallet/bluewallet
You have Bluewallet listed as Custodial, and it is clear that this is non-custodial open source wallet, and there is no provider that holds the coins.
This is probably one of the best Bitcoin mobile wallets today.
github:
https://github.com/bluewallet/bluewallet
The "audited" section is to avoid confusion of what we do. We do check reproducibility. That is we test if reviewing the code has any relevance for the binary the provider released. We do not audit wallets. Others might have audited wallets and certainly wallet providers make that claim.
If you find any factual errors, please let us know, ideally via our gitlab. The verdicts are very objective and follow the "methodology" linked in the top of the site.
We are exploring what to do about hardware wallets. Those work very differently and need a very different methodology. We will first expand to other software wallets.
The fact that you thought BlueWallet was self-custodial while implying to know the product tells me everything about why we have to keep the verdict as is for the time being. The provider added a pathetic "This wallet is hosted by BlueWallet" in the LN account creation and calls that a disclaimer.
So again, please show me one wrong categorization!