.'s avatar
. 1 week ago
This is my reasoning: If because of what Novak said to Matt about unreleased 4.0.0 resulted in (A) Matt knew being below 4.0.0 was not vulnerable + (B) Matt knew his guide was not vulnerable ie dice rolls + (C) Matt says he can't say why and to not dissect why Then (D) Are we to believe he never reasoned why? What else other than low entropy seeds fits A, B & C ? Even if he thought 4.0.1 fixed "him being able to steal all your bitcoin" he knew coldcard had created a serious issue that meets A, B, C in 2021. I don't see how the unreleased 4.0.0 usb issue meets these conditions.

Replies (6)

.'s avatar
. 1 week ago
He may have thought 4.0.1 fixed it. But that means he knew something met the conditions in unreleased 4.0.0 If you knew the company made such an error would you continue to advocate for it?
.'s avatar
. 1 week ago
Appreciate that.
It was introduced in 4.0.0 which IIUC was never released. 4.0.1 fixes an unrelated physical access bug that Matt wouldn't give two shits about because it's not a remote theft vulnerability like the 4.0.0 RNG one