Quote from: DaveF on March 10, 2025, 02:15:49 PM

Either way it's the same.
If you want to get to a certain persons BTC / crypto there are much easier ways to get to a certain person or a small group then to have a chip maker install a back door that you hope they don't find.

I'm not sure this is true. The fact that a key can be leaked means that a government can drain your wallet covertly and with impunity. It is not possible to do this with the current financial system where bank transfers and thefts can be traced to an individual or organisation or government. This gives them immense power over individuals to directly interfere in their financial affairs in a way that can be covered up as an op-sec failure on their behalf. Other ways to get at an individual involves trails of evidence and potential witnesses.

“Hope you don’t find” implies that it’s relatively straightforward for 3rd parties to verify back doors etched onto the wafer when it isn’t. Government agencies can and do keep secrets when they want to.

Quote from: DaveF on March 10, 2025, 02:15:49 PM

A small percentage of people use crypto, a smaller number use hardware wallets, an even smaller number use a wallet with a chip made by manufacturer X.

Correct, but I believe that Bitcoin is going to become a rival to the existing monetary system. Its use will expand and HW are presented as the most secure and optimal solution. The fact that people use software wallets strengthens my case as it’s much easier to leak keys with SW.

Quote from: DaveF on March 10, 2025, 02:15:49 PM

It's just not worth the effort either way.
Governments have the budget and resources and time to disrupt crypto in general and the same to do a targeted trap for any particular user or small group of users.

I think it really is worth it for the reasons given. Again, the objective is not to disrupt the Bitcoin monetary systems as a whole – quite the opposite. The aim is to grow it but have the ability to covertly target individuals as an when required.

Even if 1 in a 1000 individuals had their BTC drained, I doubt that would be enough to cause general alarm, as its very difficult to pinpoint how a key was leaked.

I agree that this is all very theoretical and amounts to a bit of storytelling. AFAIK there is zero evidence this is happening. However, it’s not for me to prove it. The onus is on the "Don't Trust, Verify" BTC proponents to justify that what I’m hypothesising is false.