Thanks, I did it. Everything vent like a charm and my Passport 2 is on the latest 2.3.5. ^{Good that I was not hasty with the update and  discovered from foundationdvcs that the problem was buried into version 2.3.2}.

May I ask ^{just of my curiosity} what could do in this case those users who have experienced frozen device . Instruction  ^{you have referred to} says users should install developer key preliminary to avoid freeze but they will not be able to this if their devices are already stuck. Is there any workaround for such case?

I see that foundationdvcs hasn't mentioned yet that in about one month time they are releasing some new type of device or tool.
There isn't much information available at this stage except a mysterious text saying, "Beyond the Hardware Wallet". Based on that, I don't think they will release a new hardware wallet. Could it be something for backing up seeds? Maybe a physical 2FA device?

You can follow Foundation's new page for this update here: https://foundation.xyz/beyond/

They have released an image of the product on X: https://x.com/FOUNDATIONdvcs/status/1856386242805674223
Talkimg is in maintenance mode, so I can't share it here.

Foundation has it's own issues. I got one for somebody when they 1st came out and now it's just a dead as mine listed above. But, since it was not in my control at all I didn't include it in the list.

If I put in the list of all the people I know with hardware wallet issues theymos would need to get more data storage for the forum. OK, it's not THAT bad but still.

I have a little security token that a bank gave me (for free) that has to be 10 years old at this point that still works. No it's nowhere as complex as a HW wallet but still....

-Dave

Can we expect anything special coming from Foundations around Bitcoin Halving date?

I know few other hardware wallet manufacturers are working on releasing special bitcoin only editions, and maybe there will be some discounts available.

We read everything posted here and take any feature requests into consideration. We appreciate your input! This next release is pretty massive.

Ha ha, my request on adding the master seed SeedQR-export into future release didn't    leave Foundation  hanging. The coming v.2.3.0 will implement it  as it is evidenced by beta variant  already dangling on the official github. Among other noticeable features is long expected (at least by me) " native OP_RETURN message viewing and signing". What a release!

$150 for a closed source box with no screen which means you have to sign your transactions blindly and which gives Block the ability to completely surveil all your transactions. Seems like all the concerns we raised multiple times in this thread have been completely ignored and Block have powered ahead with the worst possible combination of features.

Hard pass.

Are you saying  this is not true?
This is official github page for this secure element:
https://github.com/Infineon/optiga-trust-m

https://github.com/Infineon/optiga-trust-m/blob/develop/LICENSE

It is not related with Trezor, but github clearly shows that Optiga Trust M secure element have MIT open source license code, and that can be confirmed.
Firmware for Trezor was already open source, so I really don't see any issue here.

Yes, Trezor 3 Safe is using open source secure element model Infineon OPTIGA Trust M, and that can be verified.
Most of the other brands are using secure elements that are closed source.

I am not sure. At around 2:00 in the video, the guy mentions that Zirconium Dioxide is a ceramic material.

If you google "zirconium dioxide ceramic", the first result is a Wikipedia source that states: "Zirconium dioxide is one of the most studied ceramic materials." At the same time, if you ask google, "is zirconium dioxide a metal", it tells you "Zirconium dioxide, also known as zirconia and zirconium oxide, is a crystalline metal oxide that has found its way into the ceramics industry."

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zirconium_dioxide
https://matmatch.com/learn/material/zirconium-dioxide-zirconia

Yes, we discussed it before and I remember it very well, I read all of your posted sources too.
Yes, they used but Coldcard is not a Trezor's copy/paste while Passport is CC's copy/paste. Passport is the reason why CC is not open-source.

You put endless work to improve your product, then Passport copy/pastes it and both of you are on the same level. The difference is, you do the work and they gain the benefits. We can compare CC and Passport to Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison.

Bitcoin is not the first cryptocurrency but somehow it become massively popular and none copy/pasted altcoins or even improved altcoins took it over and it's a little strage for me. Bitcoin users usually say that what they love about bitcoin is its decentralized nature and anonymity (it's not) and then my question is, why choose Bitcoin when you have Monero?
By the way Satoshi has mined lots of bitcoins for himself, so, what he has to worry about?

---

My point is that the fact that ColdCard is a source verifiable doesn't make it any bad, I would use this wallet at any time because it's superior compared to other mainstream wallets.
Will Coldcard improve its product if they gain financial profit? Sure. Is the source open and can anyone read it and verify? Yes, that's what's important for me, as a wallet owner. Do you want to learn more about bitcoin hardware wallet softwares? You can read every single line of their source code anytime you wish, so, you can learn from them and come up with your product if it's better and not totally based on their source code.

Regarding Square's hardware device, which is not a hardware wallet, the one positive thing is that another brand could take a look at it and decide it's useless. But they could draw inspiration from it and actually create something meaningful and safe. But since this device is meant to target newbies and first-time crypto users, I think it will succeed regardless of its drawbacks. Good marketing results in wonders.

To be very clear – it is impossible for @Trezor to release the "first open-source secure element on the market" if they are not using the OpenPDK at Skywater foundry (130nm process or maybe 90nm when available).

TropicSquare prototypes are made at UMC in Taiwan – their PDK (process design kit) is closed source, meaning that parts of the chip will be closed source.

I am growing tired of so many Bitcoin and crypto companies wielding the term "open source" for marketing purposes while slowly diluting the definition.

It is fair to say that TropicSquare will have an "open architecture" and that parts of the chip will be "open source" – but this will not be a panacea or the "first open-source secure element."

The best project building an open source Secure Enclave is https://betrusted.io which uses an FPGA to run a simulated RISC-V chip in which the entire simulated chip is open source.

Otherwise there are no good efforts.

If we @FOUNDATIONdvcs were to build an actual open source secure element chip, we would do something very simple at 130nm or 90nm at Skywater using their OpenPDK – and open source the entire chip.

Fair, this is statement from soc media manager and it is missing nuances.
 
When you dig into Tropic Square docs, you'll see they are honest about not being *fully* opensource. But the digital design (and everything designed by Tropic Square inhouse) will be fully open source.

I never said they are cheap or cheapest wallet in the world, but they are certainly airgapped open source devices with fair price.

Due to copyright, some vendors’ code cannot be made public, and we have removed some of the code from the source code. Therefore this open source code cannot be compiled. However, we can share this part of code under an NDA if you want to fully verify the code and reproduce it. Please send an email to eng@keyst.one. Since the size of a single repo on github cannot exceed 5G, we put the code on AWS. You can access the code through this link: keystone-system