@npub1sg6p...f63m will the Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund cover any expenses that may arise from Coinkite’s (what I view to be baseless) legal action against a competing open-source project, BTClock by @Djuri?
Login to reply
Replies (24)
Wait what!? Coinkite is suing him because he made the BTClock?
I deeply regret that I bought stuff from this company
What? Coinkite think they're the only clockmakers allowed on Bitcoin now? Bad look.
Takedown for now. But it will probably be a lawsuit if a counter claim is made or they don’t comply
Very un-Bitcoin.
Scared of competition, make a better clock!
Anywhere we can git clone?
I will see.
That's ridiculous
And it is all because apparently BTClock is too similar to BLOCKCLOCK. Wtf?
Also, they have not disclosed vulnerabilities in the SEs they use in the Mk4 and Q, and have not upgraded to a drop-in replacement that is a newer version without those vulnerabilities.
Waaaat? Can we buy your clock somewhere?
its @Djuri's project
They don't like competition.
Don't know what the issue is. But if it's a serious vulnerability, this is very irresponsible behavior.
Imagine there only being one brand of wrist watch.
lol
Oof
It is somewhat costly to exploit, but the fix is replacing one part with a drop in replacement. And this attack has existed since ~2005. Not informing users about this in general is pretty irresponsible.
💡
SMH
Is this true @DETERMINISTIC OPTIMISM 🌞?
@npub1sg6p...f63m will the Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund cover any expenses that may arise from Coinkite’s (what I view to be baseless) legal action against a competing open-source project, BTClock by @Djuri?
View quoted note →
Is this a take down due to the name or a take down due to the product?
Apparently “BTClock” is too similar to “BLOCKCLOCK” and consumers would totally get confused that BTClock is a Coinkite product… and so they took all their repos and their GH org down
That’s crap! Name is not even close. I could understand if it were ClockBlock or even BlockWatch but one references the coin the other the chain. Weak and very fiat, and not a good look especially considering the community that it’s aimed at.
2005? Bitcoin related hardware? Is there a digit wrong?
No. I’m referring to the class of attack used.
Laser fault injection has existed since 2005 and defenses can be implemented for the protection of the chip, such as light sensors.
There have been 3 revisions to the ATECC chips and they still do not incorporate light sensors while your cheap credit card or transit pass does.
Let's be real we all know what it is.
didn't they also use trezor's source code for the coldcard and when foundation used theirs for the passport, coinkite switched from open source to source verifiable? yeah, i'm not interested in what you're selling.. open source or bust
they even renamed the trezor libs… shame
there is nothing wrong with building on other products