Author

Topic: Foundation Passport (FE) hardware wallet review and walkthrough (Read 1539 times)

copper member
Activity: 72
Merit: 225
Sharing this from the official Passport thread as it's a massive new update that brings all of our firmware efforts back to Founder's Edition devices and wanted to be sure everyone saw it! If you're not following that thread yet, you can do so here:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/foundation-passport-official-thread-5441422

Quote
The latest version of Passport firmware, v2.1.0, has been released!

Please note that this is our largest release in some time and also brings Founder's Edition up to date with Batch 2 devices, unifying our firmware. As this is such a large update, we'd love for you all to test it as much as you can before we announce it more widely.

Highlights of this release:

- Backporting v2.1.0 firmware to Founder’s Edition
- Sending to Taproot addresses
- A new Key Manager Extension for BIP 85 and Nostr key support and export
- BIP 85 SeedQR exports

For the full release notes, browse Github or read our blog post below:

https://foundationdevices.com/2023/05/passport-version-2-1-0-is-now-live/

NOTE: Since we are now releasing both firmware files from the same repo, the file naming has changed slightly. "Batch 2" devices use the same naming scheme for firmware as before:

Code:
v2.1.0-passport.bin

but Founder's Edition is now named explicitly to avoid confusion:

Code:
v2.1.0-founders-passport.bin
hero member
Activity: 1423
Merit: 504
First is Google, who we use for company email. This means any interaction with our customer support team has emails stored with Google.
If you self-host everything else, why don't you do the same thing for emails as well?
I can't speak for Foundation, but I do know that - especially with outgoing emails - self-hosting these days is a pretty big challenge.
Some providers will immediately flag your emails or delete them outright due to too strict firewall settings. Imagine a customer not receiving a response because their email provider didn't let Foundation team's reply through. That will probably be the main issue.

Maybe a support thread on Bitcointalk, together with support through DM (even if it may sound silly) could be a better way, avoiding email completely.

Do you have any official reseller stores in US and in other parts of the world that can sell Passport devices for cash or bitcoin in person?
I think this is a best way for reducing digital footprint and there is no risk of any leaks happening in future.
I agree that local and international brick-and-mortar resellers / distributors would be a great idea.
Though up until now everything was preorder - I don't believe that in-person preorders are very convenient; the customer would at least need to visit the store 2x. But on the other hand, they may actually be ready to do it.

Hopefully we'll see in-stock, in-person offerings around the world, after preorders are shipped!
Self hosting STMP servers is more trouble than its worth now days the one SaaS provider we cant easily pencil out spamscores being one of the hurdles for us , we've designed a system that provides anonymity via session hashstring.(the sting is essentially the receipt) you vault the strings when orders complete and purge libs, this system isn't retail investor friendly.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Little bump here:
In case you prefer a Founders Edition over the new Batch 2, there is a deal going on. Their EU reseller is clearing out stock for ~250€.

EU ONLY! 🇪🇺
Passport by @FOUNDATIONdvcs - founders edition is now available for 249,95 instead of 329,95 in our shop
🤩 https://shop.btcdirect.eu/en-gb/products/passport

Probably making space for some Batch 2 stock.. Smiley
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Hey friends! I know you are all eagerly waiting on my review of Passport v2. Good news; I received the wallet and I'm trying it out thoroughly, jotting down everything. Expect the review to be finished relatively quickly.
Oh finally IT arrived, take your time and write a good constructive review Smiley
Yes, review is out! https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/foundation-devices-passport-batch-2-hardware-wallet-review-5421713
Unfortunately, very long, but I hope the outline helps a little bit with that.

I have recent experience of waiting one package to arrive from far away country and it appears to be lost somewhere in the twilight tracking zone  Tongue
Shipping time was not that long actually; UPS only took around a day. There were just a lot of delays in the production and I had bought the device in its 'preorder' phase, so it was still being developed and manufactured.

Do note that I've not tried CoinCards yet and can't vouch or guarantee for anything. Just a way to maybe get a good deal.
I saw this deal and it's ok-ish, but I think it only only works for United States (correct me if I am wrong).
I don't think so. It should work in the Foundation Devices shop regardless of shipping location. Actually, the deal is still live, so I'll add it in my Batch 2 review.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
Hey friends! I know you are all eagerly waiting on my review of Passport v2. Good news; I received the wallet and I'm trying it out thoroughly, jotting down everything. Expect the review to be finished relatively quickly.
Oh finally IT arrived, take your time and write a good constructive review Smiley
I have recent experience of waiting one package to arrive from far away country and it appears to be lost somewhere in the twilight tracking zone  Tongue

Do note that I've not tried CoinCards yet and can't vouch or guarantee for anything. Just a way to maybe get a good deal.
I saw this deal and it's ok-ish, but I think it only only works for United States (correct me if I am wrong).

I own a Trezor Model T and a BitBox02, n0nce, as I like the idea of sending & receiving to/from a HW BTC without cables.
Have you seen recent price changes for those wallets?
Bitbox is now €139, Trezor model T is over €260, so I think that $259 price for Passport wallet is more than fair.
With discount it's even cheaper, and presale price was fantastic.
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1852
...

I own a Trezor Model T and a BitBox02, n0nce, as I like the idea of sending & receiving to/from a HW BTC without cables.

I hope that they do a good job with this new version.

Diversification even to the point of using different hardware wallets now seems to be important in these times of hackers after out BTC.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Hey friends! I know you are all eagerly waiting on my review of Passport v2. Good news; I received the wallet and I'm trying it out thoroughly, jotting down everything. Expect the review to be finished relatively quickly.

I did want to hop in mostly to tell you about this deal which I saw on Twitter earlier today.
We have officially teamed up with Coincards
Now you can buy a Passport #bitcoin wallet at a discount!
Simply purchase a Foundation gift card @CoinCards at 10% off and redeem on our site: foundationdevices.com

Do note that I've not tried CoinCards yet and can't vouch or guarantee for anything. Just a way to maybe get a good deal.
So far I can say that the v2 is a capable, compact, daily-drivable hardware wallet for sure! [of course, it has its own issues, but more on that soonTM]
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
~
Thanks for the instructions, that worked and went together rather quickly.  Were you able to emulate SD storage for exporting wallets?  Just curious how that would go importing into my wallet client.
Sorry, that was missing! You need to create a microsd folder inside of the previously created work folder. That will then be picked up by the Passport simulator as an inserted microSD.



Reference:
Code:
sudo apt install qt6-base-dev qt6-wayland # may not be required; maybe try without and report back :)
Inconclusive.  I tried without it at first, but I got an error about my camera.  I went back and installed it, but the error persisted turning out to be a VM setting which I neglected.  I might try again, I need a fresh VM to compile another couple of packages soon.
Alright, thanks for the reply though!
And thanks for bringing up the microSD storage - I will add it to the 'guide'.
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
~

Thanks for the instructions, that worked and went together rather quickly.  Were you able to emulate SD storage for exporting wallets?  Just curious how that would go importing into my wallet client.

Code:
sudo apt install qt6-base-dev qt6-wayland # may not be required; maybe try without and report back :)

Inconclusive.  I tried without it at first, but I got an error about my camera.  I went back and installed it, but the error persisted turning out to be a VM setting which I neglected.  I might try again, I need a fresh VM to compile another couple of packages soon.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
As far as I remember Trezor offers a Firmware Emulator, too.
I would only add one more emulator for DIY SeedSigner device.
This way you can test air-gapped hardware wallet in your desktop for most operating systems (windows/linux/mac), and I think someone forked it to work with Monero.
It would be interesting if someone could check out if any other hardware wallets have their own emulators like this.
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 1010
Crypto Swap Exchange
That's super cool, don't recall any other hardware wallet vendors providing a simulator before.

As far as I remember Trezor offers a Firmware Emulator, too.

As for an easy to setup and decent mail server, I'm happy with Mailcow.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
~

[1] Get Ubuntu 22.04.1 ISO and spin up the VM.
[2] Update all packages (after all, this is a fresh Ubuntu install).
Code:
sudo apt update
sudo apt upgrade
[3] Install git and dependencies
Code:
sudo apt install git autotools-dev automake libusb-1.0-0-dev libtool python3-virtualenv libsdl2-dev pkg-config curl gcc xterm
[4] Clone repository
Code:
git clone https://github.com/Foundation-Devices/passport2.git
cd passport2/simulator
[5] Install Rust & Cargo (never hurts Grin) to then install 'Just' (command runner).
Code:
curl https://sh.rustup.rs -sSf | sh
cargo install just
[6] Create work and snapshots folders (not sure why they don't exist) Edit: added microsd folder which emulates an inserted microSD.
Code:
mkdir work snapshots
mkdir work/microsd
[7] Start simulator (this builds the firmware)
Code:
just sim color



To get the camera working (kinda needed for supply chain validation), install OBS with its virtual camera feature, as well.
[8] Install QT6 dependency and OBS itself.
Code:
sudo apt install qt6-base-dev qt6-wayland # may not be required; maybe try without and report back :)
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:obsproject/obs-studio
sudo apt update
sudo apt install obs-studio

Then, start OBS, add an image of whatever QR code and make it nice and big. Images below. Lastly, restart the simulator.
If you want to reset the simulator, delete the work folder that you created earlier and re-create it (or delete all files within it).


Left: OBS setup steps; Right: How it should look like with everything set up correctly. Notice the QR code rather big and the Virtual Camera running.


Left: Camera view of Passport simulator. The QR code is a bit too large, therefore no successful scan. Right: As soon as I resized it a bit, such that it fits inside the camera view, it is scanned and the words are shown (I believe always the same hardcoded words in the simulator during Supply Chain Validation, since it doesn't obviously contain the actual secret).
Decoding addresses and transactions should work correctly, though.
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
~

Oh, I see.  Yes, that would actually be very helpful and much appreciated.  I would trust an ISO provided by you, but only in a locked up VM  Tongue  Lol, just kidding.  You've developed an honorable reputation here, and I wouldn't hesitate to play around with a binary furnished by you.  I do trust that you know what you're doing, so your skill level wouldn't be an issue at all.

I agree it's always best for one to learn how to ensure his own safety, security, and privacy.  Being able to compile binaries straight off the trunk is a good way to verify the checksums of various apps that are developed by folks for whom I have yet to develop trust.  I don't bother with Electrum or Core, but somethings are just worth the extra care.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
If you have a specific preferred Linux distro for VMs, I can spin one up real quick, install & set everything and dump the history file for you.
Be aware that it can start up fine with missing dependencies and then crash when you try to e.g. open the camera or do something else in the simulator. Wink That's why I bring it up.
Thanks for the offer!  I may take you up on it, but usually I prefer to compile these types of things myself.
Oh yes, I was not going to upload an ISO or something like that; I thought to just post the commands, similar as in my full node install guide.

I learned how to compile binaries from source back when Electrum was implementing Lightning, and I didn't have the patience to wait until they released the new version.  I won't say I'm anywhere near an expert on it, but I don't mind fumbling around until I figure it out.

As for distros, I still prefer Ubuntu Minimal for Desktop environments, but lately I've been partial to Debian for my servers.
Sounds good! It's definitely best for security, as well. Then there's no worry about reproducible build or not; you just  build directly from source, so you know you're running the latest upstream code and nothing else.

Alright; I may do it later today with Ubuntu VM and post an update.
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
That's super cool, don't recall any other hardware wallet vendors providing a simulator before.  I'll have to fire up a VM and play around with it sometime soon.  I actually have a lot of IT work to do in the next few weeks to make sure I can access all my servers while traveling oversees, so I'm not sure when I'll get around to it.  I might just get to set it up so I have something to play with on long flight.
I believe ColdCard has had one for a while, too. https://github.com/Coldcard/firmware

Lol, now that you mention it I was aware of that simulator.  In fact I played with the Mk3 version about a year and half ago.  They say the memory is the first thing to go...

If you have a specific preferred Linux distro for VMs, I can spin one up real quick, install & set everything and dump the history file for you.
Be aware that it can start up fine with missing dependencies and then crash when you try to e.g. open the camera or do something else in the simulator. Wink That's why I bring it up.

Thanks for the offer!  I may take you up on it, but usually I prefer to compile these types of things myself.  I learned how to compile binaries from source back when Electrum was implementing Lightning, and I didn't have the patience to wait until they released the new version.  I won't say I'm anywhere near an expert on it, but I don't mind fumbling around until I figure it out.

As for distros, I still prefer Ubuntu Minimal for Desktop environments, but lately I've been partial to Debian for my servers.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
I think it's actually a great idea to try this out to see how you like the Passport's UI, workflows and make yourself familiar with it, especially if you're waiting to receive one already.
Here's an image of the landing screen.
Actually, I'm waiting for your review before I order one.  Tongue
Nice! It seems that it will also go in stock & ship relatively quickly, after the preorders are delivered (starting from November).

That's super cool, don't recall any other hardware wallet vendors providing a simulator before.  I'll have to fire up a VM and play around with it sometime soon.  I actually have a lot of IT work to do in the next few weeks to make sure I can access all my servers while traveling oversees, so I'm not sure when I'll get around to it.  I might just get to set it up so I have something to play with on long flight.
I believe ColdCard has had one for a while, too. https://github.com/Coldcard/firmware

If you have a specific preferred Linux distro for VMs, I can spin one up real quick, install & set everything and dump the history file for you.
Be aware that it can start up fine with missing dependencies and then crash when you try to e.g. open the camera or do something else in the simulator. Wink That's why I bring it up.
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
I think it's actually a great idea to try this out to see how you like the Passport's UI, workflows and make yourself familiar with it, especially if you're waiting to receive one already.
Here's an image of the landing screen.

Actually, I'm waiting for your review before I order one.  Tongue

That's super cool, don't recall any other hardware wallet vendors providing a simulator before.  I'll have to fire up a VM and play around with it sometime soon.  I actually have a lot of IT work to do in the next few weeks to make sure I can access all my servers while traveling oversees, so I'm not sure when I'll get around to it.  I might just get to set it up so I have something to play with on long flight.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Double posting! Gaah Tongue I guess it's fine in this case.

My Passport Batch 2 is on its way to me and I will create a separate thread for it when it arrives.
However, to start having some fun already and preparing the review, I checked out their simulator today!

It's not the most performant VM I've seen, but then again, I ran it inside another VM. You can run Founders Edition or Batch 2.
Code:
git clone https://github.com/Foundation-Devices/passport2/
cd passport2/simulator
make color     # make mono for FE
just sim color # just sim mono for FE

A few tips and tricks:
[1] You need to create work directory in simulator.
[2] You need to create snapshots directory in simulator to take snapshots with 'Z'.
[3] You can use OBS with its 'Virtual Camera' feature. Start it before starting the simulator. Then put in an 'Image' source with whatever QR code you want to 'scan' with the virtual Passport. When you now start the Passport simulator, it picks up this virtual camera as if it was its own, so whatever you put on the canvas, it will pick up and scan.

I think it's actually a great idea to try this out to see how you like the Passport's UI, workflows and make yourself familiar with it, especially if you're waiting to receive one already.
Here's an image of the landing screen.

hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
I can't speak for Foundation, but I do know that - especially with outgoing emails - self-hosting these days is a pretty big challenge.
Some providers will immediately flag your emails or delete them outright due to too strict firewall settings. Imagine a customer not receiving a response because their email provider didn't let Foundation team's reply through. That will probably be the main issue.
Sure it can happen, but every serious company in the world have their own email with domains, it would be silly if everyone would use just gmail.
Blocking usually happens if people are using shared hosting, and I am not 100% sure but I think that ledger and trezor considered switching to self-hosted emails after leaking of their newsletter with third party partners.
Oh, it's not about using a Gmail domain; Foundation Devices do have their own domain and use it for support emails. It just appears on the backend they use Google.
And that's what the vast majority of companies does (if it's not Google, it's a different third party email provider), no matter what the domain is, which you see as an end customer.

As far as I know, truly self-hosting your IMAP and SMTP and getting all emails to come through is one of the hardest things on the internet.. Grin
But I'd be happy to be proven wrong e.g. through a written guide on how to set up self-hosted email with high success rate!



Edit: I've looked around a bit, and it seems possible, but fiddly. It's possible to land on a blacklist and then need to get un-blacklisted manually.

Self-hosting email in 2020 – Joe Nobody vs. World [02/2020]
Outlook.com is blocking my mail server [07/2020]
Outlook.com is no longer blocking my mail server [08/2020]

Now, this is a private person hosting their own private email account. If something like that happens, it's probably not critical.
But imagine what happens if as a company, you appear going 'MIA' in a support discussion or appear to be completely unresponsive to support requests, because their replies land in your spam folder.
Even one day of this can cause significant harm to a company's reputation.

Now, neither do I want to be the 'weird nerd' jumping in to protect a certain company, nor do I know for sure that this is the reason why Foundation Devices doesn't host their own support emails.
I just wanted to inform everyone who believes this to be a trivial task that it's really not.


Personally, I'd prefer not to get Foundation Devices emails for a day or two (because of landing on my email provider's blacklist or whatever)), but I kind of understand the rationale.

I also do believe it would be possible for Foundation to move to a self-hosted server, and prior to that inform customers about the change and that they might need to check their spam folder or explicitly whitelist them.
It would also be possible to write a blog post about it and link it just below the support form, so that new customers know why they may not be receiving a reply.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
I can't speak for Foundation, but I do know that - especially with outgoing emails - self-hosting these days is a pretty big challenge.
Some providers will immediately flag your emails or delete them outright due to too strict firewall settings. Imagine a customer not receiving a response because their email provider didn't let Foundation team's reply through. That will probably be the main issue.
Sure it can happen, but every serious company in the world have their own email with domains, it would be silly if everyone would use just gmail.
Blocking usually happens if people are using shared hosting, and I am not 100% sure but I think that ledger and trezor considered switching to self-hosted emails after leaking of their newsletter with third party partners.

hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
First is Google, who we use for company email. This means any interaction with our customer support team has emails stored with Google.
If you self-host everything else, why don't you do the same thing for emails as well?
I can't speak for Foundation, but I do know that - especially with outgoing emails - self-hosting these days is a pretty big challenge.
Some providers will immediately flag your emails or delete them outright due to too strict firewall settings. Imagine a customer not receiving a response because their email provider didn't let Foundation team's reply through. That will probably be the main issue.

Maybe a support thread on Bitcointalk, together with support through DM (even if it may sound silly) could be a better way, avoiding email completely.

Do you have any official reseller stores in US and in other parts of the world that can sell Passport devices for cash or bitcoin in person?
I think this is a best way for reducing digital footprint and there is no risk of any leaks happening in future.
I agree that local and international brick-and-mortar resellers / distributors would be a great idea.
Though up until now everything was preorder - I don't believe that in-person preorders are very convenient; the customer would at least need to visit the store 2x. But on the other hand, they may actually be ready to do it.

Hopefully we'll see in-stock, in-person offerings around the world, after preorders are shipped!
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
First is Google, who we use for company email. This means any interaction with our customer support team has emails stored with Google.
If you self-host everything else, why don't you do the same thing for emails as well?
I know most people use gmail, but you can't seriously expect them to respect any customer privacy.
You don't sell anything directly to third parties, but google can and probably are sharing all email content with government agencies.

As always, when buying a hardware wallet, we recommend providing as little personal information as possible. As an American company we may be required to comply with law enforcement requests (though we'd fight any request as hard as possible).
Do you have any official reseller stores in US and in other parts of the world that can sell Passport devices for cash or bitcoin in person?
I think this is a best way for reducing digital footprint and there is no risk of any leaks happening in future.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Thank you for reading and please send your questions!
Thanks for your answers! I don't think I have follow-up questions to these points directly, but I started to watch BTCSessions' Passport video for batch 2 and he quickly said that you can 'decide what you get notifications for'.
There is a selection of 'All', 'Transactions', 'Updates' and 'Security'.



Does this mean the application has some kind of remote notifications built-in (that to the best of my knowledge need to go through Google and / or Apple servers)? Or is it just a 'notification page' inside the app?
And do you use Firebase or any other Analytics / similar type framework?

I've yet to try Envoy, as I'm generally skeptical of most mobile wallet applications; none could really satisfy my privacy requirements until now.
member
Activity: 58
Merit: 104
Hi all, I have been summoned to this thread, and I appreciate all your comments and discussion! I lurk here from time-to-time but will make a more intentional effort to reply to comments in this thread. If you have any questions, please send my way! And thank you to n0nce and dkbit98 for being especially active.

Regarding our privacy policy – we currently have our Wordpress + WooCommerce instance set to automatically clear personal data from orders 60 days after shipping. For cancelled orders, those clear automatically after 30 days.

We do download, encrypt, and store data offline for sales tax reporting (typically need the zip code for each order) and for warranty/repair requests. If someone contacts us 6 months after ordering, for example, we need to be able to look up the order details and confirm they are a customer in order to send a replacement device. I hope this is reasonable, as it is necessary to store some information when operating a business where customers are buying a physical product.

We are working on an internal "vault" tool that will allow us to automatically encrypt all customer data and rate limit + audit internal requests to view that data. That will be live internally sometime next year, and will allow us to more aggressively purge data from Wordpress + WooCommerce.

We self host a lot – Wordpress, our own mailing list, our customer support center, even our internal video chat tool and scheduling website. But we do sadly rely on some third parties. First is Google, who we use for company email. This means any interaction with our customer support team has emails stored with Google.

Second is our outgoing marketing emails – we do not host our own email server, so we use Mailgun for SMTP. They log messages for 2 days (I believe).

Therefore, in our official privacy policy, we legally are required to say that we share data with third parties for marketing reasons – because we use Mailgun for SMTP for marketing emails.

We 100% do not sell your data to marketing companies or anything like that.

We have a new privacy policy going live soon that better details the exact systems we use.

As always, when buying a hardware wallet, we recommend providing as little personal information as possible. As an American company we may be required to comply with law enforcement requests (though we'd fight any request as hard as possible).

Our blog actually lays out some posts on how to preserve your privacy when buying a Passport:

Buying a Passport with PayJoin and general privacy tips: https://foundationdevices.com/2022/03/passport-coinjoin/
Using Bitcoin more privately: https://foundationdevices.com/2022/05/interacting-with-bitcoin-privately/

Thank you for reading and please send your questions!
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
Side question, though: How many of you guys read every company's privacy policy who you order from? Do you do this categorically, just for Bitcoin-related stuff, and if so, why? Interested in hearing / reading your thoughts.
Generally I read them but sometimes I don't manage to read 100% with full attention especially if they contain a lot of reading material.
Before I used to be much less careful but I guess I learned my lesson.

For anyone who is interested BTC Sessions posted good video tutorial for new Foundation Passport batch2 hardware wallet signing device.
This is full video starting with turning on device, generating seed words, to using their new envoy app, blue wallet and sparrow wallet.
Watch to the end of this video if you want to see downsides he noticed so far:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uGZHg64wwA
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18509
Side question, though: How many of you guys read every company's privacy policy who you order from? Do you do this categorically, just for Bitcoin-related stuff, and if so, why? Interested in hearing / reading your thoughts.
I do, not just for things I order, but for any site which requires me to make an account or sign up, although I appreciate I am very much on the extreme end of the spectrum here. It's why I don't have a single social media profile, why I use alternative or burner emails for almost everything, and why I buy as much stuff in person as I can.

Privacy policies for companies which delivery goods are pretty much universally awful, exactly because they must collect a name and address for shipping purposes, and they almost always retain that information and share it with third parties. This maybe isn't such a privacy or security issue for you that data brokers know you have bought a new bed, say, but it is certainly a major issue if they know you have bought a hardware wallet or other bitcoin related products, which is why bitcoin related companies need to be held to higher standard than the likes of Home Depot.

And of course I would advocate ordering to a PO Box or other location which is not directly linked to your real name and address whenever possible.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
~
Good points! I hope @zherbert will answer them, as I've no idea about those questions myself, either.

Good news, though: I just got a DM that I successfully summoned him and he'll reply soon.. Smiley



Side question, though: How many of you guys read every company's privacy policy who you order from? Do you do this categorically, just for Bitcoin-related stuff, and if so, why? Interested in hearing / reading your thoughts.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
So they seem to delete your data from online servers after either 30 or 60 days, but they keep it offline indefinitely? It would be good to get some clarification on this. It would also be good for them to update their privacy policy to reflect all this, so it is in official writing rather than just a Twitter post.
Yeah I think they need to update their website with this information to clarify everything, and I think I saw one of their team members saying they are working on that.
I prefer buying my stuff offline without leaving any personal information whenever possible, but it's impossible to do this with Passport if you live outside United States.
I don't even know if they have any official shop that sells them locally, but going to Bitcoin conferences you can probably find and buy one of this devices.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18509
Information I have is that Foundation Passport deletes (auto-purge) every customer information 60 days after device shipping, and some stuff gets deleted even after 30 days.
I went digging on their Twitter profile based on your comment here, and I found some conflicting information:
Quote
We may use your personal information and disclose it to law enforcement, government authorities, and private parties as we believe necessary or appropriate...
Yeah, as I said above, not great. Sharing with law enforcement on production of a valid subpoena or similar, while I don't like it, is absolutely necessary for a company which operates within the US, so there is nothing they can do about that. Sharing with "private parties as they believe appropriate" is not, and shouldn't be there.

The data gets de-anonymized
You mean anonymized, or de-identified. Still, anonymized data is a marketing trick, with one study showing that a staggering 99.98% of anonymized data could still be used to re-identify specific individuals. I don't want my data anonymized - I want it wiped.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
How do Foundation handle your data? Their privacy policy states the usual, that they collect your name, address, email, etc., which is obviously required to ship you a product. It also says that they can share your data with third parties for various reasons, including marketing, which is not great and frankly unnecessary. They also make no mention of how long they keep your data, so presumably that means indefinitely.
Since I took at their Privacy Policy not that long ago, I will share some quotes from my thread.

Quote
We may use your personal information and disclose it to law enforcement, government authorities, and private parties as we believe necessary or appropriate...

Quote
We make personal information into anonymous, aggregated or de-identified data by removing information that makes the data personally identifiable to you. We may use this anonymous, aggregated or de-identified data and share it with third parties for our lawful business purposes, including to analyze and improve the Service and promote our business.
The data gets de-anonymized, but they don't mention when. And you are right, I don't remember seeing anything about how long the data is stored on their servers in either form. Maybe it depends on the local laws of the State they operate in Huh
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
I couldn't see this discussed yet previously, but apologies if I've missed it. Has anyone asked them directly? Why not scrub all sensitive data after 90 days like Trezor do?
Information I have is that Foundation Passport deletes (auto-purge) every customer information 60 days after device shipping, and some stuff gets deleted even after 30 days.
This is unofficial information and maybe they didn't add this in official website yet, but it should be done in near future.
To be sure if something was changed I would contact them on official email [email protected].
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Taking my question over from this thread so as not to derail it.

How do Foundation handle your data? Their privacy policy states the usual, that they collect your name, address, email, etc., which is obviously required to ship you a product. It also says that they can share your data with third parties for various reasons, including marketing, which is not great and frankly unnecessary. They also make no mention of how long they keep your data, so presumably that means indefinitely.

I couldn't see this discussed yet previously, but apologies if I've missed it. Has anyone asked them directly? Why not scrub all sensitive data after 90 days like Trezor do?
I haven't asked them, yet. Not sure if mentioning @zherbert here summons him, but I'll also send a DM.
It would be great if he could answer directly here in this thread.

I do know they self-host all (or at least most?) of their infrastructure, to make sure that customer data leaks can't happen through service providers (like mailing list services).



One thing that springs to mind about the missing 90 day limit is that as they're doing preorders that take more than 90 days to ship, they have to keep customer information at least until the shipping date.
Keeping the information a bit longer is useful in case there's an issue with the shipment and whatnot.
legendary
Activity: 2268
Merit: 18509
Taking my question over from this thread so as not to derail it.

How do Foundation handle your data? Their privacy policy states the usual, that they collect your name, address, email, etc., which is obviously required to ship you a product. It also says that they can share your data with third parties for various reasons, including marketing, which is not great and frankly unnecessary. They also make no mention of how long they keep your data, so presumably that means indefinitely.

I couldn't see this discussed yet previously, but apologies if I've missed it. Has anyone asked them directly? Why not scrub all sensitive data after 90 days like Trezor do?

hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
I did a software BIOS update the other day on a DELL laptop and noticed something interesting. A few days earlier, I failed to get the installation running and I wasn't sure what was wrong. And when I tried it a few days later, it worked flawlessly. The reason being that my laptop was charging at the time. I guess DELL won't allow you to perform BIOS updates unless your device is on a charger, just in case you run out of juice. Or the remaining battery capacity has to be above a certain percentage.
I know that Lenovo Thinkpad laptops doesn't allow you to complete BIOS update unless you plug in your working battery, and you need to plug in electric cable as well.
This was done so that you wouldn't brick your device in case electric power suddenly cuts off for whatever reason, your battery would prevent that.
Yes, it's a concept that is implemented in a lot of mobile electronics, from all sorts of vendors.
As Pmalek mentioned, though, the issue with triple-A's is that the device manufacturer (in this case Foundation) doesn't know which battery type you are using.

The whole issue with this design choice is that Alkalines are less efficient (drain excess power) if you hit them with a too high load, plus the electronics of 'Passport FE' can't handle a low voltage (below 1.1-1.2V-ish). This combined means that a pretty full pair of Alkalines can drain quickly if you initiate a firmware upgrade, while it would happily do a multiple of the energy-equivalent in 'transaction signatures'.

Anyhow, I don't think we have a lot more to add to the topic of 'v1 battery choice bad', since the company is actively shipping v2 with Li-Ion rechargeable batteries, by now... Wink
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
I did a software BIOS update the other day on a DELL laptop and noticed something interesting. A few days earlier, I failed to get the installation running and I wasn't sure what was wrong. And when I tried it a few days later, it worked flawlessly. The reason being that my laptop was charging at the time. I guess DELL won't allow you to perform BIOS updates unless your device is on a charger, just in case you run out of juice. Or the remaining battery capacity has to be above a certain percentage.
I know that Lenovo Thinkpad laptops doesn't allow you to complete BIOS update unless you plug in your working battery, and you need to plug in electric cable as well.
This was done so that you wouldn't brick your device in case electric power suddenly cuts off for whatever reason, your battery would prevent that.
To conclude, if you don't have working battery you can't update BIOS on Thinkpad laptops.
Hardware wallets I use didn't have any battery, but you could use them connected with your laptops (that has battery) to prevent issues during firmware update.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
If I remember correctly, either the device tells you to check the battery charge isn't too low or their instructions do. So you kind of do it at your own risk. I certainly haven't tried what happens when cutting power during a firmware update, but speaking in broad terms, this is something that can indeed happen when updating microcontroller firmware.
I did a software BIOS update the other day on a DELL laptop and noticed something interesting. A few days earlier, I failed to get the installation running and I wasn't sure what was wrong. And when I tried it a few days later, it worked flawlessly. The reason being that my laptop was charging at the time. I guess DELL won't allow you to perform BIOS updates unless your device is on a charger, just in case you run out of juice. Or the remaining battery capacity has to be above a certain percentage.

Would be a cool addition to a battery-powered hardware wallet to have some sort of meter that wouldn't allow you to perform firmware upgrades if the battery is below 50% or 20% depending on how long the process usually takes and how much power it wastes. With on-screen instructions to charge your battery fully and try again. Of course that wouldn't be easy to do since there are so many different types of batteries with different run times. 
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Fair enough answer, thank you for your input.  I, for one, am particularly pleased by their idea about creating a Hardware Wallet device that is, similarly to Ledger, concealed under another object.  Ledger did great with the USB design, Foundation did great with the mobile one.

But at the same time, there is one thing I personally hate about both ideas.  It is that I think the more futuristic/modern design you put into the final product, the more likely it is that a criminal would take the device(s) during a robbery.  I can only guess the logo on the back and all of that is part of a marketing plan, right?  Would you say a less slick design and the lack of a logo on the back would make this device less of a target during robbery?

For instance, you have the FE vs v2 in a comparison image above.  My personal thoughts on the upgrade is that it is great they made it thinner, which makes it more concealed, but on the other hand it turned modern and reminds me of the more expensive classic devices we had decades ago.

If I had the choice, I would pick a very boring design with the same functionality over the modern v2.  But I definitely can not ignore that Foundation has one goal in their mind, which is SELLING products, for which reason a more modern aspect of it is more approachable by the public than a boring one would be.  Am I just too paranoid or does anyone else share my thoughts?

-
Regards,
PrivacyG
I do share your opinions completely. It's interesting that Foundation has never put out any marketing material (website, videos, ...) claiming its resemblance to an older mobile phone to be a feature for concealment, so that's the reason I can't go too hard on them not 100% fulfilling this concept. The design could just as well be the result of a design process that was looking for something which is easy to carry and use in one hand, with good legibility on the screen and large enough buttons for everyone to use.

You're also absolutely right that the gold elements and strong accents (in shape and color) don't reduce the chance of being targeted during robbery and make it stand out more in general. Both v1 and v2 don't really look like old phones, but I'd love this concept to be pursued by Foundation or another company in the future. In a lot of countries, such phones are still used either as primary, secondary or burner phones, so even seeing a person fiddling with what looks like a 2000's mobile phone, doesn't draw a lot of attention, in my opinion.

I'm debating on 'stealthening' my v2, through removing gold paint and maybe even painting the backside completely in black.
Another (much bigger) project idea would be to 'retrofit' the hardware into a real old phone's chassis; by using all the open-source files. This would also allow to confirm the hardware is 'really open-source' - if a random person on the internet is able to build their own device from scratch.

In the end, I'm not sure why they chose this design. Maybe it was simply a good shape / form factor (as described above), maybe they think that it can still pass as an old phone, even with modern styling, I'm not sure. Of course, it can't be too ugly if you're trying to sell thousands of it. But at least for the very limited v1 run, I guess they could have found 1,000 customers who buy a non-attractive looking (but very nicely concealed) model. Maybe @zherbert is reading and can reply! Wink
I'm not sure about v2, but in v1 the back cover is simply a 'dumb shell' (no electronics or complex components whatsoever), so it would be nice and appreciated if they offered replacement back covers in e.g. black in the future. Easy, cheap, non-destructive mod which would give better concealment.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 1723
Crypto Swap Exchange
Fair enough answer, thank you for your input.  I, for one, am particularly pleased by their idea about creating a Hardware Wallet device that is, similarly to Ledger, concealed under another object.  Ledger did great with the USB design, Foundation did great with the mobile one.

But at the same time, there is one thing I personally hate about both ideas.  It is that I think the more futuristic/modern design you put into the final product, the more likely it is that a criminal would take the device(s) during a robbery.  I can only guess the logo on the back and all of that is part of a marketing plan, right?  Would you say a less slick design and the lack of a logo on the back would make this device less of a target during robbery?

For instance, you have the FE vs v2 in a comparison image above.  My personal thoughts on the upgrade is that it is great they made it thinner, which makes it more concealed, but on the other hand it turned modern and reminds me of the more expensive classic devices we had decades ago.

If I had the choice, I would pick a very boring design with the same functionality over the modern v2.  But I definitely can not ignore that Foundation has one goal in their mind, which is SELLING products, for which reason a more modern aspect of it is more approachable by the public than a boring one would be.  Am I just too paranoid or does anyone else share my thoughts?

-
Regards,
PrivacyG
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Great thread.  I share your fears about battery dying while the device is getting a firmware upgrade, particularly if you never used a particular batch of batteries, never bought from the brand of batteries you just put in the Passport or if you unknowingly initialize an upgrade with low battery.  Is it actually likely this device could get hard bricked during an update if it dies during it?  I for one know this can definitely at least soft brick a Ledger, so would not be too surprised.
Thanks, PrivacyG! To be fair, it comes with one set of the 'good batteries' (that don't suddenly die and do last for multiple hours), so you could use those in case you didn't use them right when you got the device.
If I remember correctly, either the device tells you to check the battery charge isn't too low or their instructions do. So you kind of do it at your own risk. I certainly haven't tried what happens when cutting power during a firmware update, but speaking in broad terms, this is something that can indeed happen when updating microcontroller firmware.
Keep in mind there are only 1,000 FE devices sold, and v2 fixed the battery issue so it's possible that nobody will ever run into a bricked Passport due to low battery... Tongue

n0nce, would you mind sharing your thoughts about why someone should choose Foundation Passport over, say, a Trezor device?
That's a good question. I believe the biggest benefit is airgap; not only for security but also for convenience. Especially when used through QR codes, you don't need to carry (or search for) anything, except the wallet itself (no cable and no microSD). Just hold the wallet's screen up to your computer / laptop / smartphone camera and transfer the PSBT that way. Best convenience I've had yet in a hardware wallet; and it doesn't even require a 'convenience vs security tradeoff', which is otherwise often the case.

Probably second would be that it has a secure element, which the Trezor doesn't. So less worry about what happens when it sits on your desk for 2 weeks while on holiday or something.
Third would be the larger 'user interface' (both screen size and buttons). It allows for much more comfortable, quick (pin / passphrase input) and confident use (e.g. when it comes to checking the recipient's address).

I don't know if Trezor is as good when it comes to the open-source hardware aspect, but I don't see hardware attacks as a very likely attack vector for most people anyway. It's still nice to have though, e.g. it's easily user-verifiable that the screen hasn't been tampered with (circuit etched on glass) and there are no closed-source chips anywhere in the device (e.g. keypad), just gives you a little extra peace of mind.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 1723
Crypto Swap Exchange
Great thread.  I share your fears about battery dying while the device is getting a firmware upgrade, particularly if you never used a particular batch of batteries, never bought from the brand of batteries you just put in the Passport or if you unknowingly initialize an upgrade with low battery.  Is it actually likely this device could get hard bricked during an update if it dies during it?  I for one know this can definitely at least soft brick a Ledger, so would not be too surprised.

n0nce, would you mind sharing your thoughts about why someone should choose Foundation Passport over, say, a Trezor device?

-
Regards,
PrivacyG
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
You mean Bitcoin Core is incompatible with more affordable hardware wallets?

Not in general terms, no.  But as it's "shipped" and in regards to the specific method of exporting PSBTs from a watch only wallet and transfer them via mSD, yes.  The Trezor One and comparably priced wallets that I know of don't have a micro SD slot.  My comments were regarding the discussion of using core to avoid the privacy concerns of using SPV clients (without your own server.)  And as far as I know there's no way to sign a PSBT without client to pair with the Trezor One.  I suppose one could just use an empty electrum wallet to sign and broadcast.


I was mainly referring to an issue where -txindex really helped me out. At that point in time, I wasn't aware that you can't actually look up a transaction if you don't have that toggled on.
The default value of -dbcache can also easily be too high or too low depending on use case and hardware availability.

But this all refers to building from source. I'm not actually sure what options are toggled or not when getting Bitcoin-Qt binaries.

Interesting!  I would have assumed those would be defaults, even when building from source.  Thanks for the tip, I'm sure I would have overlooked that.


Yeah; I'd still like the 'camera verification' to work as intended though, since the inclusion of a camera is one of the biggest selling points of this device. So please make it usable anywhere that makes sense.. Wink

I hope they're lurking here reading your posts, you have a lot of great suggestions.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Yes, with Passport it's the same thing. Basically you transfer PSBTs back and forth using a microSD card.
Still it's pretty straight forward.  Unfortunately however, incompatible with the more affordable hardware wallets on the market.
You mean Bitcoin Core is incompatible with more affordable hardware wallets?

Yeah, Bitcoin Core default / minimal install options don't include everything... Wink
I reckon you've been down this road before.  Any other options you recommend I consider?  Might as well turn it into a rainy-month-of-sundays.  Cheesy
I was mainly referring to an issue where -txindex really helped me out. At that point in time, I wasn't aware that you can't actually look up a transaction if you don't have that toggled on.
The default value of -dbcache can also easily be too high or too low depending on use case and hardware availability.

But this all refers to building from source. I'm not actually sure what options are toggled or not when getting Bitcoin-Qt binaries.

Sure; you can always do that. It's worth mentioning that the text file which Passport writes to the microSD also includes a few addresses that can be checked against Bitcoin Core's address tab, too.

That makes things more convenient.  I do trust in my ability to keep my rigs free of malware.  I've been at it long enough, so trust my clipboard with regular verification.
Yeah; I'd still like the 'camera verification' to work as intended though, since the inclusion of a camera is one of the biggest selling points of this device. So please make it usable anywhere that makes sense.. Wink
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Yes, with Passport it's the same thing. Basically you transfer PSBTs back and forth using a microSD card.

Still it's pretty straight forward.  Unfortunately however, incompatible with the more affordable hardware wallets on the market.


Yeah, Bitcoin Core default / minimal install options don't include everything... Wink

I reckon you've been down this road before.  Any other options you recommend I consider?  Might as well turn it into a rainy-month-of-sundays.  Cheesy


You mean verifying manually by putting the Passport in front of your monitor and comparing some addresses letter by letter?

Exactly.


Sure; you can always do that. It's worth mentioning that the text file which Passport writes to the microSD also includes a few addresses that can be checked against Bitcoin Core's address tab, too.

That makes things more convenient.  I do trust in my ability to keep my rigs free of malware.  I've been at it long enough, so trust my clipboard with regular verification.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Okay, so I just tried following along the Foundation Devices' video and it did work fine-ish.
I like how Bitcoin Core is the very first option in the 'pair wallet' menu.
Nice.  I just imported a wallet from my ColdCard, which makes it easy.  However, it's just a watch only wallet used to export PSBTs.
Yes, with Passport it's the same thing. Basically you transfer PSBTs back and forth using a microSD card.

In the process I noticed that my version of Bitcoin QT doesn't have external signer support, the option is greyed out on the GUI wallet-creation dialogue, and I get an error when I try from the console:

Quote
Compiled without external signing support (required for external signing) (code -4)

Apparently I'll have to compile my own GUI with external signer enabled to use a wallet like the Trezor One.  That just turned into a two-rainy-day project, lol.
Yeah, Bitcoin Core default / minimal install options don't include everything... Wink

Unfortunately, the address verification fails, because the QR code from Bitcoin core (I checked using a QR code parser) contains 'bitcoin:BC1Q....', whereas passport expects the address in all lowercase.
~
My Passport is on the latest firmware version, so it's either possible that it worked when they made the video and something was broken between then and now, or it's possible that it never worked and was way at the bottom on some developer's todo-list and was never done. What suggests me this is that he doesn't show in the video how Passport scans and confirms the address. I will open a GitHub issue about this.

That's actually a pretty slick feature, I hope they fix it.  Although after thinking about it, I'm so anal I'd probably still end up verifying the address the old-fashioned way.
You mean verifying manually by putting the Passport in front of your monitor and comparing some addresses letter by letter?
Sure; you can always do that. It's worth mentioning that the text file which Passport writes to the microSD also includes a few addresses that can be checked against Bitcoin Core's address tab, too.
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Okay, so I just tried following along the Foundation Devices' video and it did work fine-ish.
I like how Bitcoin Core is the very first option in the 'pair wallet' menu.

Nice.  I just imported a wallet from my ColdCard, which makes it easy.  However, it's just a watch only wallet used to export PSBTs.  In the process I noticed that my version of Bitcoin QT doesn't have external signer support, the option is greyed out on the GUI wallet-creation dialogue, and I get an error when I try from the console:

Unfortunately, the address verification fails, because the QR code from Bitcoin core (I checked using a QR code parser) contains 'bitcoin:BC1Q....', whereas passport expects the address in all lowercase.
~
My Passport is on the latest firmware version, so it's either possible that it worked when they made the video and something was broken between then and now, or it's possible that it never worked and was way at the bottom on some developer's todo-list and was never done. What suggests me this is that he doesn't show in the video how Passport scans and confirms the address. I will open a GitHub issue about this.

That's actually a pretty slick feature, I hope they fix it.  Although after thinking about it, I'm so anal I'd probably still end up verifying the address the old-fashioned way.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
@n0nce, have you tried to use the Passport with bitcoin core's external signer feature? 

Honestly, I've never played with the feature myself.  Since I do run my own electrum server I haven't been too concerned about the privacy issue, but I think more and more hardware wallet manufacturers should make integration with core more user friendly.
I haven't! Thanks for this great suggestion; I will try at the latest when v2 arrives. Then I could check both devices back to back.

But they do have a video where they show how to do it with v1; it's under 10 minutes and explains everything quite well.
https://docs.foundationdevices.com/user-manual/software-wallets/bitcoin-core

This conversation just got me thinking about the privacy aspect of using Core instead of an SPV client.  It's probably not something newbies are going to pursue unless it's super user-friendly and easy to set up, but it might make for a fun experiment nonetheless.  I think I'll add the experiment to my list of rainy day projects, and see if I can get the Trezor One to work with Core.
Okay, so I just tried following along the Foundation Devices' video and it did work fine-ish.
I like how Bitcoin Core is the very first option in the 'pair wallet' menu.


Unfortunately, the address verification fails, because the QR code from Bitcoin core (I checked using a QR code parser) contains 'bitcoin:BC1Q....', whereas passport expects the address in all lowercase.

My Passport is on the latest firmware version, so it's either possible that it worked when they made the video and something was broken between then and now, or it's possible that it never worked and was way at the bottom on some developer's todo-list and was never done. What suggests me this is that he doesn't show in the video how Passport scans and confirms the address. I will open a GitHub issue about this.
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
@n0nce, have you tried to use the Passport with bitcoin core's external signer feature? 

Honestly, I've never played with the feature myself.  Since I do run my own electrum server I haven't been too concerned about the privacy issue, but I think more and more hardware wallet manufacturers should make integration with core more user friendly.
I haven't! Thanks for this great suggestion; I will try at the latest when v2 arrives. Then I could check both devices back to back.

But they do have a video where they show how to do it with v1; it's under 10 minutes and explains everything quite well.
https://docs.foundationdevices.com/user-manual/software-wallets/bitcoin-core

This conversation just got me thinking about the privacy aspect of using Core instead of an SPV client.  It's probably not something newbies are going to pursue unless it's super user-friendly and easy to set up, but it might make for a fun experiment nonetheless.  I think I'll add the experiment to my list of rainy day projects, and see if I can get the Trezor One to work with Core.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
What other types would you like to connect to? Bitcoin Core through RPC? I guess it can be requested and / or added and PR'ed when it goes live on GitHub.
You nailed it [I was hoping it'd have fewer node restrictions in comparison to Trezor Suite, but as things stand, it offers fewer options].
- I hope someone does the latter part of your quote.
Alright! I may look into this in the future (I know - I say this a lot.. got too many ideas and projects for a single life..).

On the other hand, it's meant to be a basic, small-feature-set thing to get people started easily without focus on 'power users' for the time being, as far as I know.
You have a point, but isn't it easier to just connect [directly] our Bitcoin Core nodes instead? As someone who uses Windows OS, I decided to not deal with the hassle of running an Electrum server in the past [CMIIW but AFAIK, it's still a similar case for Windows users].
To me, it's definitely easier to connect to a personal Electrum server, this has been my go-to setup for what feels like forever. But I'm a person with a lot of devices and a lot of wallets, so it's always been easiest for me to have at least one box running a full node that I can access from anywhere, instead of running Bitcoin Core on my personal computers.
I wasn't aware of Bitcoin RPC being commonly used over the network though; only ever used that when accessing Core from the same machine. Last I checked it also had no encrypted authentication, so I believe it would be pretty risky to connect from phone to node through remote RPC.

For what it's worth, there is a guide for installing Bitcoin Core and Electrum on Windows here.



@n0nce, have you tried to use the Passport with bitcoin core's external signer feature? 

Honestly, I've never played with the feature myself.  Since I do run my own electrum server I haven't been too concerned about the privacy issue, but I think more and more hardware wallet manufacturers should make integration with core more user friendly.
I haven't! Thanks for this great suggestion; I will try at the latest when v2 arrives. Then I could check both devices back to back.

But they do have a video where they show how to do it with v1; it's under 10 minutes and explains everything quite well.
https://docs.foundationdevices.com/user-manual/software-wallets/bitcoin-core
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
@n0nce, have you tried to use the Passport with bitcoin core's external signer feature? 

Honestly, I've never played with the feature myself.  Since I do run my own electrum server I haven't been too concerned about the privacy issue, but I think more and more hardware wallet manufacturers should make integration with core more user friendly.

legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 3406
Crypto Swap Exchange
What other types would you like to connect to? Bitcoin Core through RPC? I guess it can be requested and / or added and PR'ed when it goes live on GitHub.
You nailed it [I was hoping it'd have fewer node restrictions in comparison to Trezor Suite, but as things stand, it offers fewer options].
- I hope someone does the latter part of your quote.

On the other hand, it's meant to be a basic, small-feature-set thing to get people started easily without focus on 'power users' for the time being, as far as I know.
You have a point, but isn't it easier to just connect [directly] our Bitcoin Core nodes instead? As someone who uses Windows OS, I decided to not deal with the hassle of running an Electrum server in the past [CMIIW but AFAIK, it's still a similar case for Windows users].

You mean mask it with duct tape and spray paint it? That would work as a last resort, in case it's hard to take apart, sure.
Yes, exactly Smiley
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
I found some comparison images between old and new Passport devices.
~Snipped~
https://i.imgur.com/nRzUJnK.jpg
Did they alter the foundation letters' color into black or is it just because of the reflection?
Totally missed that, you're right! I'd appreciate it since it's already flashy enough with all that gold colour..

All owners of Passport Founder’s Edition can apply for beta testing of their new Envoy app.
I was excited to see their app, but I'm a bit disappointed that it only supports certain types of nodes [e.g. running on Tor and Electrum servers].
- Skip to "0:08 seconds on this" video.
What other types would you like to connect to? Bitcoin Core through RPC? I guess it can be requested and / or added and PR'ed when it goes live on GitHub. On the other hand, it's meant to be a basic, small-feature-set thing to get people started easily without focus on 'power users' for the time being, as far as I know.

Still not a fan of the golden buttons on the front; I consider taking them out and spray-painting them..  Lips sealed
Polish may do the trick. I hope these devices are easy to disassemble..
Or you can go with the traditional way of using duck tapes and plastics to cover other areas instead Wink
You mean mask it with duct tape and spray paint it? That would work as a last resort, in case it's hard to take apart, sure.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 3406
Crypto Swap Exchange
I found some comparison images between old and new Passport devices.
~Snipped~
https://i.imgur.com/nRzUJnK.jpg
Did they alter the foundation letters' color into black or is it just because of the reflection?

All owners of Passport Founder’s Edition can apply for beta testing of their new Envoy app.
I was excited to see their app, but I'm a bit disappointed that it only supports certain types of nodes [e.g. running on Tor and Electrum servers].
- Skip to "0:08 seconds on this" video.

Still not a fan of the golden buttons on the front; I consider taking them out and spray-painting them..  Lips sealed
Polish may do the trick. I hope these devices are easy to disassemble..
Or you can go with the traditional way of using duck tapes and plastics to cover other areas instead Wink
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
~snip
Looking good to me! I like how from the side and back it keeps the same black-gold-white 'sandwich' design aesthetic. Being a little larger is also welcome, since v1 is really really small. With the reduced thickness it may be possible to put in a small purse, pocket or similar without it sticking out. That's something I will test out in the real world when I get it.
Still not a fan of the golden buttons on the front; I consider taking them out and spray-painting them..  Lips sealed
If you are patient, then you can wait for the gold paint to rub off and come off on its own. Then you don't have to spray-paint. Smiley
Actually, yes; removing the paint is better than adding on top. Polish may do the trick. I hope these devices are easy to disassemble.. Fortunately, we will get open-source drawings which should help determining how to open it up without damage!
 
Color display wasn't really needed for me and the UI looks more cluttered; but I'm by far most curious to see what battery life it will have. It's a little funny 'anecdote' that the v1's batteries are actually almost empty when they took that picture. Really the biggest issue with v1.
It seems to me that a monochrome display would be quite enough. Does v.1 have a backlight? And is there a difference in battery life in v.1 and v.2? Does the color display consume more power?
Yes, v1 has sufficient backlight (not in the bright sun, though). Version 2 has a totally new battery concept. Lithium-ion rechargeable battery instead of single-use Lithium AA. It's supposed to last longer and even if it won't, you can always just recharge, right. But nobody wants to sit around a pile of (fresh and used - since they need to be recycled) double-A's. As long as you stick to (very expensive) Lithium AA's, they will hold for a couple hours, too, but they're expensive and not as available to buy locally. Using Alkalines will result in the aforementioned pile.

I would also like to know how long it takes to turn passport on and off, if anyone has tested this? How fast does it happen? It makes no sense to keep the device constantly on, which means that most of the time it will be turned off and will be used only when necessary. I was always annoyed in some models of phones for a long turn on.
Just tested:
Boot: 7 seconds to PIN screen, 6 seconds after that.
Shutdown: under 1 second (basically instant).

You're right: you won't run this for long periods of time. When I use it to sign a transaction, the time from turning it on to turning it back off is often under 1 minute including PIN entry and address verification. Large screen and nice handling (e.g. no cable sticking out, sits in hand well) makes it very easy and comfortable to do so quickly.

Looking good to me! I like how from the side and back it keeps the same black-gold-white 'sandwich' design aesthetic. Being a little larger is also welcome, since v1 is really really small. With the reduced thickness it may be possible to put in a small purse, pocket or similar without it sticking out. That's something I will test out in the real world when I get it.
I like that it's slightly wider and taller, and even though it's not much thinner it makes the thickness more proportional over all.  The form factor makes it look like a small, cheap phone, which camouflages it from the uninitiated.  That's a good thing.
True; making it look less conspicuous would also be one of the reasons for me to remove the gold paint on the front buttons. I also expected v1 to be a lot larger than it really is, which means it quickly reveals that it's not a phone (too small), so larger size will be appreciated for 'rough opsec', as well.

Color display wasn't really needed for me and the UI looks more cluttered; but I'm by far most curious to see what battery life it will have. It's a little funny 'anecdote' that the v1's batteries are actually almost empty when they took that picture. Really the biggest issue with v1.
The display looks much brighter in the photos, but I wonder how much of that is due to the battery level on V1.  Anyway, my aging eyes are likely to appreciate the colors, sometimes it's easier to see contrasting colors other than black and white.
It's important to note that the display brightness on v1 doesn't fade with dying battery. It stays on whatever you set it to, until the battery runs dry. It's possible that in the picture it wasn't set to max. brightness, but honestly the screen is not super bright, so I'm fairly confident v2 will be brighter. To be pedantic; colors actually have less contrast than pure black and white. But I need to see both side-by-side in person to really evaluate any screen improvements.
copper member
Activity: 2170
Merit: 4238
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Looking good to me! I like how from the side and back it keeps the same black-gold-white 'sandwich' design aesthetic. Being a little larger is also welcome, since v1 is really really small. With the reduced thickness it may be possible to put in a small purse, pocket or similar without it sticking out. That's something I will test out in the real world when I get it.

I like that it's slightly wider and taller, and even though it's not much thinner it makes the thickness more proportional over all.  The form factor makes it look like a small, cheap phone, which camouflages it from the uninitiated.  That's a good thing.


Still not a fan of the golden buttons on the front; I consider taking them out and spray-painting them..  Lips sealed

Not to stereotype my own race, but it looks like they have Arabs running their aesthetic design team.  Cheesy


Color display wasn't really needed for me and the UI looks more cluttered; but I'm by far most curious to see what battery life it will have. It's a little funny 'anecdote' that the v1's batteries are actually almost empty when they took that picture. Really the biggest issue with v1.

The display looks much brighter in the photos, but I wonder how much of that is due to the battery level on V1.  Anyway, my aging eyes are likely to appreciate the colors, sometimes it's easier to see contrasting colors other than black and white.

Anyway, I'm patiently waiting for your review...   And a Black Friday sale.  Cool
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1296
keep walking, Johnnie
~snip
Looking good to me! I like how from the side and back it keeps the same black-gold-white 'sandwich' design aesthetic. Being a little larger is also welcome, since v1 is really really small. With the reduced thickness it may be possible to put in a small purse, pocket or similar without it sticking out. That's something I will test out in the real world when I get it.
Still not a fan of the golden buttons on the front; I consider taking them out and spray-painting them..  Lips sealed
If you are patient, then you can wait for the gold paint to rub off and come off on its own. Then you don't have to spray-paint. Smiley
 
Color display wasn't really needed for me and the UI looks more cluttered; but I'm by far most curious to see what battery life it will have. It's a little funny 'anecdote' that the v1's batteries are actually almost empty when they took that picture. Really the biggest issue with v1.
It seems to me that a monochrome display would be quite enough. Does v.1 have a backlight? And is there a difference in battery life in v.1 and v.2? Does the color display consume more power?

I would also like to know how long it takes to turn passport on and off, if anyone has tested this? How fast does it happen? It makes no sense to keep the device constantly on, which means that most of the time it will be turned off and will be used only when necessary. I was always annoyed in some models of phones for a long turn on.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
While we are waiting for n0nce to receive his new batch2 Passport wallet, I found some comparison images between old and new Passport devices.
We can see that new device is taller, thinner and it has much better screen, but I think that major improvement was made inside with new battery design.
All owners of Passport Founder’s Edition can apply for beta testing of their new Envoy app.

   
Looking good to me! I like how from the side and back it keeps the same black-gold-white 'sandwich' design aesthetic. Being a little larger is also welcome, since v1 is really really small. With the reduced thickness it may be possible to put in a small purse, pocket or similar without it sticking out. That's something I will test out in the real world when I get it.
Still not a fan of the golden buttons on the front; I consider taking them out and spray-painting them..  Lips sealed

Color display wasn't really needed for me and the UI looks more cluttered; but I'm by far most curious to see what battery life it will have. It's a little funny 'anecdote' that the v1's batteries are actually almost empty when they took that picture. Really the biggest issue with v1.

I'm going to check out how to get that Envoy Beta; while the wallet works just fine with existing, 'tried and tested' software, I'm excited when a manufacturer puts in the time to create their own optional software with their own touch. The way I experienced Foundation Devices as a company so far, their code may be more trustable than e.g. very popular mobile wallet BlueWallet. I had a look at their application and the code a while back and noticed that you can get push notifications, which have to be issued by their server and then run through Google / Apple servers subsequently. Even if you set your own Electrum server (so the public keys / xpubs aren't sent to the company's server), notifications are still handled by their infrastructure. I contacted them about it, let's see if anything will change.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
While we are waiting for n0nce to receive his new batch2 Passport wallet, I found some comparison images between old and new Passport devices.
We can see that new device is taller, thinner and it has much better screen, but I think that major improvement was made inside with new battery design.
All owners of Passport Founder’s Edition can apply for beta testing of their new Envoy app.

   
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
I've waited a bit longer than I thought for another update on Passport, but I wanted to have more than one thing to share.

First of all, it appears after multiple months of delays, things are speeding up now.
The price was increased from the 'preorder' price of $199 to the final price of $249; much closer to the 'batch 1' / 'v1' price of $299, but probably a better deal since it appears to be a bit better and costs almost 20% less. It also indicates that the 'shipping in July' notice seems realistic, as waiting more than a month, paying 'retail' (as opposed to the earlier 'preorder') price would be a bit of a ripoff.
$249.00 Add to cart

They announced a 'very soon' deadline a lot of times already, but the price increase indicates to me that they're confident this time (fingers crossed).
SHIPPING UPDATE

We are excited to announce that final assembly for Passport Batch 2 is beginning next week, and we expect to begin shipping to customers by end of next week!

Special preorder pricing of $199 for Passport is also ending this week.



My second update to this thread is that after 5 months of frequent usage, I went through less batteries than I thought, but in some situations it's still pretty unconvenient / risky if you don't have 'Lithium' (not Lithium-Ion!) batteries.

To visualize this: if you set the screen brightness to the lowest setting and quickly turn on the device, enter your password, sign a PSBT on a microSD and turn it right back off, it consumes so little energy that you can use a set of batteries for months.
But if you do something more energy intensive, like a firmware upgrade, it drains the battery terrifyingly quickly; to the point where I was worried it would shut down during the upgrade and brick the device. So while I'd today say 'it's fine' using readily available Alkalines in everyday usage (and I still love the idea of using those) it's risky to run it on Alkalines for firmware upgrades or probably also stuff like device reset and restore operations. In that case, do get new (expensive) Lithium one-time-use batteries or hook up an external 3V power supply to the battery connectors.

Something like this could actually make sense for maximum safety:

legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
I guess you have a lot to catch up on when it comes to hardware wallets. Luckily, you are in the right sub-board for that. Start reading the threads in the Hardware wallets sub that you think look interesting.

Let me give you a few recommendations and then we should get out of this thread because this discussion is about the Foundation Passport and not HWs in general. If you have additional questions, ask in the appropriate threads.

[BIG LIST] Hardware wallets (80+)
This is a big list of popular and not so popular HWs.

Open Source Hardware Wallets
This is a shorter one focusing only on devices that are open-source.

Show off your hardware wallet
Here you can take a look at some picture posted by forum members and see how they look in real life.

Sorry n0nce...
hero member
Activity: 854
Merit: 1246
Whao! @n0nce, this is one in series of hardware wallet review I have ever seen. At first I thought hardware wallet is meant only for Fiat physical currency while software wallet is for online banking and transactions but today I have come to fully understand the hardware wallet.

Divers hardware wallets
After reading the OP, I also made some research to see more hardware wallets and to understand it more, then I came to see different kinds of hardware wallets.


Flash drive like and cell phone like hardware wallets and I was wow!!!

https://www.google.com/search?q=hardware+wallet&client=ms-android-transsion-itel-rev1&prmd=inv&sxsrf=ALiCzsYnOJiQ_iHd_joKghamx8pKYRKe6A:1654468865318&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjohonosJf4AhVThM4BHcv4CCwQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=320&bih=512&dpr=1.5


Hi, this is Zach from Foundation Devices.

Batteries

For the batteries, we chose AAA's very early on for a few reasons. We liked the security profile (they are 100% "dumb" with no chip inside), they are readily available across the world, and they allow for the device to operate in an airgapped manner.

What we didn't realize, though, is how bad normal AAA's are at holding their voltage. If the voltage dips too much, then Passport simply can't operate. So normal AAA's used with Passport aren't fully drained – they can be used in devices like remote controls – but they are too drained for Passport to handle.

We didn't realize this until later on, and by then it was too far along to pause everything and redo the electromechanical design. So we responded by canceling our order of normal AAAs, finding some sources for more expensive Lithium AAA's, and publishing a support guide that recommended an option of rechargeable lithium (constant voltage) AAA's to our users.

In hindsight, I think our AAA decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.


zherbert, in any electronic device that uses battery. Battery is the most important feature of the device. If the battery is not strong the device is useless. If you can see the cell phone technological world, those cell phones that have weak battery are not popular in the market. Therefore, with this review even though you can't retrieve all the batteries that have been produced and sent, the new ones you are to produce should be improved to stay longer for good recommendation.

I am also using AAA batteries for my Satellite Decoder Remote now and the batteries are better than Tiger batteries.
full member
Activity: 378
Merit: 167
betfury
That's why I don't want to buy from Amazon, Cryptomaan or anything else.
Sorry, but I don't understand what do you mean exactly...
You plan to order hardware wallet, but you already know that you are going to return it later or what?
It's pretty standard procedure and I don't remember last time I had to return something that I ordered, especially if it was paid by bitcoin.
I may have expressed myself wrong. I was concerned that if I would order the wallet, I would only buy it from the manufacturer himself. Because at Amazon, Cryptomaan etc. the products can be returned. For me, this is no longer a security product. There have already been enough cases like e.g. with Ledger. Fake ledgers were sold there. They looked exactly like the originals. I want to say that the Foundation is on the right track and does not accept returns after shipping.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/8v5d43/is_my_ledger_fake_i_ordered_this_from_amazon_from/
hardware wallets that provide a physical form of wallets that are lightweight and easy to carry anywhere, although it's not a dream but I need to save money to buy this wallet unlike software, which is quite the opposite. lucky you who are in the scope of the amazon market another thing that makes it easy to return and exchange if not what you want happens. Me who is in Asia may be able to complain, but time efficiency and risk on the road are taken into consideration beyond the price of a hardware wallet, of course what is sent
JL0
full member
Activity: 817
Merit: 158
Bitcoin the Digital Gold
That's why I don't want to buy from Amazon, Cryptomaan or anything else.
Sorry, but I don't understand what do you mean exactly...
You plan to order hardware wallet, but you already know that you are going to return it later or what?
It's pretty standard procedure and I don't remember last time I had to return something that I ordered, especially if it was paid by bitcoin.
I may have expressed myself wrong. I was concerned that if I would order the wallet, I would only buy it from the manufacturer himself. Because at Amazon, Cryptomaan etc. the products can be returned. For me, this is no longer a security product. There have already been enough cases like e.g. with Ledger. Fake ledgers were sold there. They looked exactly like the originals. I want to say that the Foundation is on the right track and does not accept returns after shipping.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ledgerwallet/comments/8v5d43/is_my_ledger_fake_i_ordered_this_from_amazon_from/
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
That's why I don't want to buy from Amazon, Cryptomaan or anything else.
Sorry, but I don't understand what do you mean exactly...
You plan to order hardware wallet, but you already know that you are going to return it later or what?
It's pretty standard procedure and I don't remember last time I had to return something that I ordered, especially if it was paid by bitcoin.
JL0
full member
Activity: 817
Merit: 158
Bitcoin the Digital Gold
Does the Foundation ever consider sending the devices themselves from the EU, e.g. to Austria, Switzerland, etc.? Then you don't have to trust the reseller.
They ship international to most countries but shipping can be expensive, so I recently saw someone who is opening EU based shop, but I am not sure if this is official reseller or not.
All this is for Passport Foundation Edition, and I don't think there are any resellers who are selling new batch devices.
Maybe you should contact Foundation team to find more information about this.

But you can not deliver the package to the parcel lockers. Because of customs etc. there are problems. For example, Keystone has recently started to deliver directly from Europe.
Is this Keystone Amazon EU store opened or you are talking about something else?


Yes it is the Amazon store.

Cryptomaan:

Quote
You have the right to return your order up to 14 days after receipt, without having to state your reasons, provided the seal hasn't been broken. When the seal is broken, your order is finalised and can no longer be returned. If you wish to make use of your right of withdrawal, then you have another 14 days to return your product after the cancellation. The return costs will be at your own expense.

Foundation:

Quote
Since Passport is a security device for storing Bitcoin, we cannot accept product returns.

That's why I don't want to buy from Amazon, Cryptomaan or anything else.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
Does the Foundation ever consider sending the devices themselves from the EU, e.g. to Austria, Switzerland, etc.? Then you don't have to trust the reseller.
They ship international to most countries but shipping can be expensive, so I recently saw someone who is opening EU based shop, but I am not sure if this is official reseller or not.
All this is for Passport Foundation Edition, and I don't think there are any resellers who are selling new batch devices.
Maybe you should contact Foundation team to find more information about this.

But you can not deliver the package to the parcel lockers. Because of customs etc. there are problems. For example, Keystone has recently started to deliver directly from Europe.
Is this Keystone Amazon EU store opened or you are talking about something else?

legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
Does the Foundation ever consider sending the devices themselves from the EU, e.g. to Austria, Switzerland, etc.? Then you don't have to trust the reseller.
The shipping is quite expensive. I remember checking it back when n0nce created his review and it was $40 no matter where you ship it to. I randomly tried with different EU, non-EU, and South American countries, but the rates never changed.

Yes, they ship international.
Their reseller network is not bad.

  • They have the UK covered with BTC Direct.
  • Cryptomaan is for costumers from the Netherlands and Belgium.
  • Other European countries include Slovenia, Russia, and Ukraine.
  • Asia has only one reseller located in Malaysia.

https://foundationdevices.com/resellers/
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Does the Foundation ever consider sending the devices themselves from the EU, e.g. to Austria, Switzerland, etc.? Then you don't have to trust the reseller.
Yes, they ship international.
But you can not deliver the package to the parcel lockers. Because of customs etc. there are problems. For example, Keystone has recently started to deliver directly from Europe.
Really? It may depend on location; I have a system where my locker is basically a regular address; never had an issue, also with imports. But it surely depends on the system and of course direct delivery would be better. Or just order from a local official reseller.
JL0
full member
Activity: 817
Merit: 158
Bitcoin the Digital Gold
Does the Foundation ever consider sending the devices themselves from the EU, e.g. to Austria, Switzerland, etc.? Then you don't have to trust the reseller.
Yes, they ship international.
But you can not deliver the package to the parcel lockers. Because of customs etc. there are problems. For example, Keystone has recently started to deliver directly from Europe.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
There are a few potential attacks if it were possible to remove the PIN, one of the most trivial to understand being the supply chain attack. Someone could resell a used unit as new by resetting the device and resealing everything. They could buy the device, flash a modified (insecure) firmware, remove the PIN and sell it to a victim. As far as I know, you need to set it up once (thus also seting a PIN) to flash a custom firmware.
How does a non-technical person verify that it's a genuine Foundation Passport hardware wallet with a genuine firmware? You mentioned supply chain attacks, and since I only have experience with Ledger, I know that a fake Ledger device can't connect to official Ledger servers. So if someone in the supply chain replaced the HW with a fake one or made modifications to it, I wouldn't be able to use it with the official software. How does it work with Foundation's HW? 
JL0 correctly linked to the guide from Foundation Devices about supply chain validation, which they urge you to go through during setup. They obviously also have some packaging protection as highlighted in my unboxing.

Honestly, constantly relying on some server to be able to use the device seems a risk of security and effectively allows the manufacturer to brick the device whenever they want. Foundation needs online servers for this initial verification, but after that you can use it indefinitely without server availability.

Does the Foundation ever consider sending the devices themselves from the EU, e.g. to Austria, Switzerland, etc.? Then you don't have to trust the reseller.
Yes, they ship international.
JL0
full member
Activity: 817
Merit: 158
Bitcoin the Digital Gold
There are a few potential attacks if it were possible to remove the PIN, one of the most trivial to understand being the supply chain attack. Someone could resell a used unit as new by resetting the device and resealing everything. They could buy the device, flash a modified (insecure) firmware, remove the PIN and sell it to a victim. As far as I know, you need to set it up once (thus also seting a PIN) to flash a custom firmware.
How does a non-technical person verify that it's a genuine Foundation Passport hardware wallet with a genuine firmware? You mentioned supply chain attacks, and since I only have experience with Ledger, I know that a fake Ledger device can't connect to official Ledger servers. So if someone in the supply chain replaced the HW with a fake one or made modifications to it, I wouldn't be able to use it with the official software. How does it work with Foundation's HW?  
You can read about it at 11.1 Passport Supply Chain Validation.

https://github.com/Foundation-Devices/passport-firmware/blob/main/SECURITY/SECURITY.md

Does the Foundation ever consider sending the devices themselves from the EU, e.g. to Austria, Switzerland, etc.? Then you don't have to trust the reseller.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
There are a few potential attacks if it were possible to remove the PIN, one of the most trivial to understand being the supply chain attack. Someone could resell a used unit as new by resetting the device and resealing everything. They could buy the device, flash a modified (insecure) firmware, remove the PIN and sell it to a victim. As far as I know, you need to set it up once (thus also seting a PIN) to flash a custom firmware.
How does a non-technical person verify that it's a genuine Foundation Passport hardware wallet with a genuine firmware? You mentioned supply chain attacks, and since I only have experience with Ledger, I know that a fake Ledger device can't connect to official Ledger servers. So if someone in the supply chain replaced the HW with a fake one or made modifications to it, I wouldn't be able to use it with the official software. How does it work with Foundation's HW? 
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Let's see what else they can tell us about them next week; fortunately you can cancel the preorders at any time..
I see many people commenting how they like the new design and I guess it's always going to be something like that when someone is creating redesigned device.
On one hand, sure, but how about just offering some colour choices to choose from? Shouldn't be too much more expensive. Anyhow, I decided to keep the preorder since I ended up liking and continuing to use the v1 to this day. The timeline was pushed back a few times; hopefully it arrives soon.

Best thing would be to have smaller group of testers who would provide feedback before main release, that way most of the issues would be avoided.
I think that crypto crowdsourced projects are totally different from normal tech industry, but on positive side look what ledger did with many millions they collected, they created worst X crap ever.
Let's wait few more days to see more information and better image previews.
Yes, being able to give early product feedback would be great; renders would completely suffice for figuring out elements like form factor, colours and overall design - no need to send out prototypes (which are admittedly extremely expensive to make one-offs of).

Thx @n0nce for a competent review and picking on important issues. That's transparancy I enjoy.

The first version of the wallet has properties that are almost a no-go for me. Inferior power supply design. (While I like the ability to use AAA or better AA size batteries, the power circuit should've indeed been better designed to get more high enough voltage out of more normal batteries of rechargeable ones.)
You're welcome. I actually have a little update on the 'battery situation'. After having bought a huge pack of Alkaline batteries (40 or so), I've only used 2 of them so far and switched to number 3 & 4 a while ago. If you just turn it on, verify an address and turn it back off, it (understandably - but still) uses very very little energy and you can use it regularly without swapping batteries much. It also doesn't drain them at all if you leave them in when powered down (I had the suspicion there was a little power draw while turned off but I was wrong).
So it's not as bad as it first seemed, but it's still clear they messed up the circuitry; Foundation honestly admitted themselves they found this problem too late & had to 'quick fix' it by telling people to buy expensive Lithium batteries. I expect this to be much better on v2, let's see if the device meets expectations.

Regarding "batch 2":
I kinda like the design more than the first one, to be honest. But design has less priority for me. It has to be easy to use for the tasks that it's made for.

I have no idea how long those Li-ion rechargeable batteries will be available and how long one lasts, even if it is a very common type. For a device intended to be kept for years such rechargeables are kind of "planned" obsolescense, a point of failure which I'm not happy with.
I guess design is just very subjective, but like you, I can disregard it if it's technologically a good device. The battery model that they seem to be using is one that I've seen around for at least 10 years, maybe even heading towards 20.

The manifacturer could mitigate this if it were possible to use the device connected to a cabled power source like the charger but without necessity of a rechargeable battery inside the wallet. Is this possible? This way you could still use the device if the battery isn't available anymore or you happen to have none which is still OK.
I don't know about this, as I haven't gotten my preordered unit yet.

There is one thing that I don't understand and what is for me nearly a no-go for this nice hardware wallet: what is the purpose of a non-resettable device PIN once it has been defined for the first time? Does this also apply for the batch 2 variant? What is the security idea behind such a device design decission? I don't get it.
From a hardware wallet I expect it to be fully factory resettable, including any user defined device PIN to unlock it.
This is explained in their user manual:

To change Passport's PIN, first enter your old PIN and then confirm the new PIN twice.
Passport will display new security words when entering your new PIN.
For security reasons, you cannot erase the PIN and bring Passport to a factory-fresh state – you can only change the PIN.
There are a few potential attacks if it were possible to remove the PIN, one of the most trivial to understand being the supply chain attack. Someone could resell a used unit as new by resetting the device and resealing everything. They could buy the device, flash a modified (insecure) firmware, remove the PIN and sell it to a victim. As far as I know, you need to set it up once (thus also seting a PIN) to flash a custom firmware.

I don't know if v2 will be exactly the same, but I've asked them once and if I recall correctly, they're aiming to keep the codebase of v1 and v2 similar / mostly the same. As their naming suggests, as a 'batch 2' device, it should be fairly similar to v1 software-wise, with mostly hardware changes.
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 1010
Crypto Swap Exchange
Thx @n0nce for a competent review and picking on important issues. That's transparancy I enjoy.

The first version of the wallet has properties that are almost a no-go for me. Inferior power supply design. (While I like the ability to use AAA or better AA size batteries, the power circuit should've indeed been better designed to get more high enough voltage out of more normal batteries of rechargeable ones.)
But I'm not going to address any more on the first device version.

Regarding "batch 2":
I kinda like the design more than the first one, to be honest. But design has less priority for me. It has to be easy to use for the tasks that it's made for.

I have no idea how long those Li-ion rechargeable batteries will be available and how long one lasts, even if it is a very common type. For a device intended to be kept for years such rechargeables are kind of "planned" obsolescense, a point of failure which I'm not happy with. The manifacturer could mitigate this if it were possible to use the device connected to a cabled power source like the charger but without necessity of a rechargeable battery inside the wallet. Is this possible? This way you could still use the device if the battery isn't available anymore or you happen to have none which is still OK.

There is one thing that I don't understand and what is for me nearly a no-go for this nice hardware wallet: what is the purpose of a non-resettable device PIN once it has been defined for the first time? Does this also apply for the batch 2 variant? What is the security idea behind such a device design decission? I don't get it.
From a hardware wallet I expect it to be fully factory resettable, including any user defined device PIN to unlock it.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
Let's see what else they can tell us about them next week; fortunately you can cancel the preorders at any time..
I see many people commenting how they like the new design and I guess it's always going to be something like that when someone is creating redesigned device.
Best thing would be to have smaller group of testers who would provide feedback before main release, that way most of the issues would be avoided.
I think that crypto crowdsourced projects are totally different from normal tech industry, but on positive side look what ledger did with many millions they collected, they created worst X crap ever.
Let's wait few more days to see more information and better image previews.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
@n0nce did you hear the latest new about delayed release of Passport Batch2, because of supply chain issues manufacturing will begin in late March.
Website will be updated with more details next week, and now check out small sneak peak for new device bottom part with dials.
Much more sharper design this time, reminds me on decepticons from transformers Smiley


https://twitter.com/FOUNDATIONdvcs/status/1499492207081963524
Oh no that doesn't look very good! Cry You're right, it does seem like something from the Transformers movies.
Let's see what else they can tell us about them next week; fortunately you can cancel the preorders at any time..

I honestly don't understand why they are again using this model of: developing something with little to no information, collecting money (but offering to refund any time) and only showing the final product shortly before release. This way they have no chance to incorporate user feedback because it's way too late (molds done and stuff).

In v1, people could have warned them to make sure the circuit works with Alkalines, could have asked them not to make a plastic screen, and they could have made it. Since they didn't give any info about this before shipping, obviously it was too late. This time, there is no way for them to change the buttons at this point in time, since they never asked - during the design stage.

Usually, crowdsourced projects are (should be) developed with close communication to the 'investors' / buyers to make sure they won't be unhappy with the product and to make sure they won't all cancel their orders shortly before you want to ship.
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
@n0nce did you hear the latest new about delayed release of Passport Batch2, because of supply chain issues manufacturing will begin in late March.
Website will be updated with more details next week, and now check out small sneak peak for new device bottom part with dials.
Much more sharper design this time, reminds me on decepticons from transformers Smiley


https://twitter.com/FOUNDATIONdvcs/status/1499492207081963524
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
The Passport also doesn't play well with normal rechargeable (Li-Ion) cells, since these start at 1.3V and from my testing that's approximately where Passport stops working due to too low voltage.
Did you mean NiMh cells here? Li-ion produces 3.7V. Or am I missing something else?
Oh, you're right; it appears Li-Ions only exist in 3.7V (according to Wikipedia). Then I will edit my post accordingly.

Quote
They explicitly recommend Lithium cells ~ they are very uncommon and expensive. The ones that came with my Passport lasted for probably 4h; while Alkalines last maybe 15 minutes or 30 tops.
I didn't even know Lithium AAA batteries exist. I think a better solution would have been if the device fits 3 batteries. With some voltage regulation, anything between 3.6 and 4.5V can be brought down to 3V, so that standard AAA batteries can be used until they're completely drained. From your pictures it looks like that would mean a slightly wider device.
Myself neither. According to Zach's reply it seems they didn't plan to use (or maybe even know) them themselves from the start either. Apparently, they discovered if they pull whatever currents an STM32 needs (triple digit milliAmps I guess), an Alkaline drains exponentially faster than on lower currents, but since it was discovered very late, they couldn't change the 'electromechanical design'.
Three AAA's with a step-down would fix the issue to some degree (counteracting rather linear discharge curve), but not sure it affects the current issue. Like, that they're apparently not made for higher currents and when used in such scenario, their capacity is crippled.

Quote
4x rechargeable constant voltage (builtin charger): 25€
I didn't know these exist! It looks like a great solution, but won't solve the "10-20 years time" problem.
Well, in 10-20 years I can either get new rechargeable ones or also just get available Alkalines. The rechargeables would be needed if you use the device as a daily driver. To sweep it in the future, a set of Alkaline batteries is enough. They can power it for like 15 minutes easily. Of course you will also be able to retrieve your seed backup anyway, right... Wink
legendary
Activity: 3290
Merit: 16489
Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021
The Passport also doesn't play well with normal rechargeable (Li-Ion) cells, since these start at 1.3V and from my testing that's approximately where Passport stops working due to too low voltage.
Did you mean NiMh cells here? Li-ion produces 3.7V. Or am I missing something else?

Quote
They explicitly recommend Lithium cells ~ they are very uncommon and expensive. The ones that came with my Passport lasted for probably 4h; while Alkalines last maybe 15 minutes or 30 tops.
I didn't even know Lithium AAA batteries exist. I think a better solution would have been if the device fits 3 batteries. With some voltage regulation, anything between 3.6 and 4.5V can be brought down to 3V, so that standard AAA batteries can be used until they're completely drained. From your pictures it looks like that would mean a slightly wider device.

Quote
4x rechargeable constant voltage (builtin charger): 25€
I didn't know these exist! It looks like a great solution, but won't solve the "10-20 years time" problem.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
~
I see, thanks for looking it up! I remembered the battery pack a bit differently, more like the old Nintendo Wii remote battery packs. But obviously I didn't look close enough.


This type of battery pack wouldn't add any thickness to the Passport FE, since it already has space for 2 cells. Just an idea! Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
It seems to me like the Li-Ion battery in the keystone is basically 3 rechargeable 's stuck together in a piece of plastic. That would have been possible e.g. as a 'replacement back piece' for FE.  
In Keystone Pro you get one slim rechargable Li-ion batter yon the left so I am sure it's impossible to get any battery cramped inside.
On the right side you are getting empty fat back part replacement battery holder that can use AAA batteries, and this makes your hardware wallet have much bigger back.
Here is one review by John Chow dot Com from 2021 so you can see the BIG difference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAV0kchQF-g



Maybe Passport can do something similar, releasing some conversion pack for users with first version devices.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
@n0nce this is probably one of the best hardware wallet reviews I ever saw on bitcointalk forum, and I am sure it will attract other people who are not registered in this forum.
What an honor! Cheesy

I do think that Passport needs a lot of improvements, especially with their display, that is weak spot in many hardware wallets like incase of ledger.
I even saw someone saying that after little use of Passport wallet their screen started to show signs of malfunction, but that could be exception not a rule.
Yes, I saw it as well. Here's a link for everyone else: https://twitter.com/Mandrik/status/1485278977417789444
Though it is the only time I (and apparently Foundation themselves) saw it so far, unlike other brands with very high failure rates. So it might very well be an exception. The screen in use doesn't seem like a cheap piece of crap; as a raw component it costs around $30! That's half the sale cost of some complete hardware wallets.
Thanks to open source hardware, we can easily find the component on Mouser.

I think that price should be lower, they need to make better battery solution, and remove all the games bloatware (or at least give option to easy install without firmware games).
Compared to ColdCard I think they are going in right direction, releasing everything in public and going open source as much as possible.
I agree with what you said, but seems everything's addressed in version 2. Fingers crossed! Regarding games, I was thinking of trying to recompile myself, after deleting the 'extras' menu & flashing it, but just didn't find the time yet. May update later.

In hindsight, I think our AAA decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.
I don't know how Keystone is doing it, but they have both options in their PRO version.
You can use regular Li-ion battery and optional AAA regular batteries.
I think that is the proper way of doing things.
It seems to me like the Li-Ion battery in the keystone is basically 3 rechargeable AA's stuck together in a piece of plastic. That would have been possible e.g. as a 'replacement back piece' for FE. As I said; they can make a lot of money in accessories for their FE and 'version 2' if they don't know what to build next! Grin

Plastic Quality
Best thing you can do for plastic material is to have your own 3d printer, and print/control whatever you want.
After a few years of 3D printing experience: if you have one of the common filament-based machines, it's not the best thing, for sure. It's great for quick prototyping and mechanical parts, but nowhere near as pretty as what they send (injection-molded).
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
Cashback 15%
@n0nce this is probably one of the best hardware wallet reviews I ever saw on bitcointalk forum, and I am sure it will attract other people who are not registered in this forum.
I do think that Passport needs a lot of improvements, especially with their display, that is weak spot in many hardware wallets like incase of ledger.
I even saw someone saying that after little use of Passport wallet their screen started to show signs of malfunction, but that could be exception not a rule.

I think that price should be lower, they need to make better battery solution, and remove all the games bloatware (or at least give option to easy install without firmware games).
Compared to ColdCard I think they are going in right direction, releasing everything in public and going open source as much as possible.

ColdCard is from Canada with higher and more expensive costs then the US in a lot of places and they have theirs for under $150.
Nothing personal, but I have to be honest and say that ColdCard looks like a cheap calculator, it uses cheaper materials like plastic and should I mentioned all the crap they are doing now.
They are not open source anymore, they removed reference for ever using trezor code, and now with NFC they are not air-gapped anymore.
It's not a big problem to hire workers from Vietnam, India, East Europe or similar places to work in Canada and make cheap hardware wallets.

In hindsight, I think our AAA decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.
I don't know how Keystone is doing it, but they have both options in their PRO version.
You can use regular Li-ion battery and optional AAA regular batteries.
I think that is the proper way of doing things.

In hindsight, I think our screen decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.
Have you think about using some kind of e-paper e-ink display, like the ones that are used in e-book readers?
Remember to put some plastic foil over the screen on your next model, some people never remove them Smiley

Plastic Quality
Best thing you can do for plastic material is to have your own 3d printer, and print/control whatever you want.
legendary
Activity: 3500
Merit: 6205
Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!
What we didn't realize, though, is how bad normal AAA's are at holding their voltage.
(~snip~)
In hindsight, I think our AAA decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.

Since such a device has a very big chance to be used mostly from home, it may be also an option to also offer the (additional) option of using the device in a plugged-in manner and draw power either from an USB, either from a charger. It may also mean some more accessories to be sold.

Another direction could be bigger/better known rechargeable batteries - like Nokia's BL5C or Sony's NP-BX1 (I'm talking about size, not about the voltage, that's something I'm not good at).
I am telling this because some years ago I've had a camera using AA batteries (luckily also rechargeable) and at start I was extremely happy that it works with standard batteries I've soon got disappointed that I had to carry with me a huge lot of them if I wanted to make pictures for one full day. My later camera works with NP-BX1, I have 3 such batteries (one original, 2 cheaper Chinese ones) and I usually don't need 2 for one full day. Plus a cheap Chinese external charger working from USB and the batteries' small format makes a happy family. Indeed, I cannot buy the batteries at the next shop, but I can recharge mine in the car.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
This might be a stupid question, but why does the FE not have a charger, so if I wanted to, I wouldn't have to use any batteries if I didn't need them?   
Interesting idea; for instance a USB-C connector but only with power contacts soldered...
I don't really see an issue, because you cannot hack the device if there are no data lines.

However, power analysis / glitching and such types of attacks may be easier to perform. Though you can also hook up your glitching device to battery terminals, so it's not really that much less secure with such a 'backup energy source'. Would also allow to test for hours at a time without thinking about batteries.

Probably Foundation was going for a 'complete port-less' approach, because people simply may not understand it's still fully airgapped even if they see a physical USB port on it. Not everyone knows how many pins such a connector has and what it means if you tell them 'we only soldered on GND and VDD'.  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
Thanks for the honesty Zach.

n0nce has already posted some estimates regarding the battery life of Batch #2, but can you provide some more information about this? Based on your tests, how long will a fully charged battery last for the second generation?

Regarding the plastic vs glass covers. I personally prefer glass. I have cellphone with a glass back cover. It's a big fingerprint magnet, but I don't mind it because it feels and looks more professional.

This might be a stupid question, but why does the FE not have a charger, so if I wanted to, I wouldn't have to use any batteries if I didn't need them?   
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
PS: One more question; will both devices run the same firmware? If not, will new and old device's firmwares be developed and maintained in parallel?
GitHub has no repository for the new firmware, which makes me hope they run the same one; thus reducing codebase to maintain + elongating FE update support.
Hi, Ken from Foundation Devices here.

I wanted to make sure that FE had a long life, so I put in quite a bit of effort to make sure that it would be able to run the newer codebase.

There will be two separate firmware downloads, but they will be built from the same codebase.

There are improvements in the new hardware that we'll be announcing soon, but, to the extent possible, we're trying to make the firmware on the two devices have similar features.

Note that there might be an initial delay of a few weeks in releasing the first FE version of this new code, but after that my intention is that new firmware versions for the two devices get released simultaneously.

Cheers!
Cool, really appreciate this. Makes sense that compilation will change slightly between devices and you'll need some extra code for Li-Ion charging circuit for example, I suppose. But it's great to hear the codebase stays common! Not only for longevity but also for security. Since a bug found in one device will also make the other one more secure, as well as a static security analysis making more sense if it covers more devices.

On this topic: I haven't seen a PGP key on your GitHub, where you talk about responsible disclosure, in case someone wants to send a bug report or even exploit via encrypted mail.

IMHO, if people choose FE rather than other hardware wallet (such as Ledger and Trezor) which is cheaper and easier to use, it's more likely they have better secure practice. I wouldn't worry about malicious application which replace PBST file if you perform good security practice and verify the transaction before sign/broadcast process.
Oh, for sure, but maybe it would be worth adding to the guide or something. Like, especially with airgap, people may expect to be able to use it on fully infected machines and shit and rely too much on perceived security. On the other hand, the large screen makes it very easy to confirm the receiver address and if that matches, you're obviously good.

Good point, HW wallet such as Ledger and Trezor could be used on infected device and it's not easy to perform MitM attack on USB connection.
Well, USB is not 'un-MITM'-able as well, but to me it seems easier to write a shellscript checking for removable drives than hooking into USB communication.
legendary
Activity: 2856
Merit: 7410
Crypto Swap Exchange
I didn't expect someone would review $299 device (excluding possible import tax and shipping cost). But with such high cost, i'm really annoyed they don't bother include rechargeable lithium AAA when they include industrial class microSD.
Hehe, you know me - I'm not 'someone' Wink Oh yes that would have been a cool idea, to simply include rechargeable AAA's, but I think those then would also have a closed-source chip which is something they wanted to avoid and thus chose to use standard 'dumb' batteries.

I totally forget about closed source battery. But i don't see how it could impact using FE since usually it's used to make electronic device only accept specific brand/type of battery.

Example, https://hackaday.com/2011/03/30/headphones-use-standard-sized-but-proprietary-rechargeable-batteries/.

IMHO, if people choose FE rather than other hardware wallet (such as Ledger and Trezor) which is cheaper and easier to use, it's more likely they have better secure practice. I wouldn't worry about malicious application which replace PBST file if you perform good security practice and verify the transaction before sign/broadcast process.
Oh, for sure, but maybe it would be worth adding to the guide or something. Like, especially with airgap, people may expect to be able to use it on fully infected machines and shit and rely too much on perceived security. On the other hand, the large screen makes it very easy to confirm the receiver address and if that matches, you're obviously good.

Good point, HW wallet such as Ledger and Trezor could be used on infected device and it's not easy to perform MitM attack on USB connection.
newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 2
PS: One more question; will both devices run the same firmware? If not, will new and old device's firmwares be developed and maintained in parallel?
GitHub has no repository for the new firmware, which makes me hope they run the same one; thus reducing codebase to maintain + elongating FE update support.
Hi, Ken from Foundation Devices here.

I wanted to make sure that FE had a long life, so I put in quite a bit of effort to make sure that it would be able to run the newer codebase.

There will be two separate firmware downloads, but they will be built from the same codebase.

There are improvements in the new hardware that we'll be announcing soon, but, to the extent possible, we're trying to make the firmware on the two devices have similar features.

Note that there might be an initial delay of a few weeks in releasing the first FE version of this new code, but after that my intention is that new firmware versions for the two devices get released simultaneously.

Cheers!
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Regarding the scratched screen. Does Passport have any recommendations on how to protect the device from further scratches? In the OP you mentioned that the curved screen makes it difficult to stick on a screen protector. I haven't really played with those things, so I don't know why that would be a problem.
I don't think they have any recommendation for this. I can try to ask them Zach, any recommendations? But it doesn't seem to scratch easily from normal usage. Do you know how sometimes when you look at a piece of plastic on a product and you immediately know: 'this is gonna scratch fast'? This material is not that. In contrast, BitBox02 does look like it (and it does scratch this fast).

With this gentle curve, it might be possible, to be honest. Might try giving this site a shot:
https://www.protectionfilms24.com/custom-sizes.html

We can see from the source files that the screen is 1.092"x1.416" or around 27.73mmx35.96mm.

For a single one it's pretty expensive, but if you get 10, it's just 2 bucks per screen protector.


A big no go to me is the batteries. The wallet itself is rather expensive + you are going to need a new set of batteries quite often. You only got 4 hours out of the ones that came with it? That's really bad performance-wise. The money you will spend on purchasing new batteries will be more than what you paid for the HW.
Well, it depends on the usage. Turning it on, performing a transaction and turning it off again takes probably 1-5 minutes tops, so 4h would be 50 transactions in worst case. I drained mine in a day since I played around with it a bunch and then stood for 2h in the shop stamping seed words off the device directly. Probably better to write it onto paper and turning it off, then copying from the paper.
Regarding costs, you can get a 4-pack of compatible rechargeables for 25 bucks, so you get 2 to use for other stuff. And I did really like the concepts of standard AAA's (or AA's, wouldn't mind) since I know I can find these in 20 years time pretty surely. (worst case hook up a 3V power supply to battery terminals)

They are also worried about security of Li-Ion batteries, but I'm honestly not. Never seen an attack through a battery so far (correct me if I'm wrong).

I see from your post that the second version will be shipped with Li-Ion batteries. Hopefully that can improve the stand-by time.
If they can fix the insufficient battery life, lower the price, and manage to create a HW that won't suffer major security issues and vulnerabilities in the future, this would be something I would consider purchasing for long-term storage. At the moment, it isn't.     
I mean they did lower the price by 33% which is a large jump and the Li-Ion will definitely hold longer. These things are common (which I really like for longevity / what if Foundation fails & I need new batteries etc.) and hold around 1000mAh, I believe. However, they discharge better, if it makes sense. So it will be similar battery life to the Lithium batteries (multiple hours on a charge), but you can recharge and also carry a second battery. I really loved when phones could do this (e.g. bring a few charged spare batteries on a trip and not mess with charging all the time).



I didn't expect someone would review $299 device (excluding possible import tax and shipping cost). But with such high cost, i'm really annoyed they don't bother include rechargeable lithium AAA when they include industrial class microSD.
Hehe, you know me - I'm not 'someone' Wink Oh yes that would have been a cool idea, to simply include rechargeable AAA's, but I think those then would also have a closed-source chip which is something they wanted to avoid and thus chose to use standard 'dumb' batteries. I still like the idea of 'dumb batteries', but maybe the circuit could have been designed around Alkalines instead of around Lithium cells in a way. Though if the current draw is too high, there's no way around Alkalines or Ni-MH (but then you have to take into account these operate at 1.2V).

IMHO, if people choose FE rather than other hardware wallet (such as Ledger and Trezor) which is cheaper and easier to use, it's more likely they have better secure practice. I wouldn't worry about malicious application which replace PBST file if you perform good security practice and verify the transaction before sign/broadcast process.
Oh, for sure, but maybe it would be worth adding to the guide or something. Like, especially with airgap, people may expect to be able to use it on fully infected machines and shit and rely too much on perceived security. On the other hand, the large screen makes it very easy to confirm the receiver address and if that matches, you're obviously good.

If they can fix the insufficient battery life, lower the price, and manage to create a HW that won't suffer major security issues and vulnerabilities in the future, this would be something I would consider purchasing for long-term storage. At the moment, it isn't.     

I doubt it's easy to lower the price when it's still assembled in U.S which have high wage cost.
In my opinion, the new price of $199 is substantially lower and well priced. I would probably recommend even FE for $199 (without the planned improvements). Just found $299 too high, but that's probably due to economy of scale and being start-up.



I know we discussed the battery life or lack of it in another thread. Did you ever trace down what might have been pulling all that power? I think that they are powering the camera when not in use due to what I saw on the power feed when I had one in pieces but I only had it for a few minutes to test before it had to be handed back. It was not mine and they were shipping it back so I could not be sure and did not want to really bring it up till someone else was testing one.
Yup! I knew I missed something. Grin I wanted to better explain in the review but forgot. From what I see, there are two issues.
1) If you draw an even moderately high current from Alkaline batteries, their capacity cripples. You cannot draw 1.2A (1200mA) for an hour straight from a 1200mAh Alkaline, for example. You can draw a tenth of it for 10h though. Since the Passport runs a normal microprocessor, I expect it to pull anywhere from 500mA to 1A for sure, which is simply too high for Alkalines, they're not made for it.
2) The circuit just can't work with anything below like 1.3V... A battery is not dead at 1.3V, so I would have expected some circuitry to meaningfully 'boost' it up to 1.5V in the device (even though there are losses when doing this) so it can continue working until really fully drained. This can't defeat physics / chemistry (1) though.

I don't think the camera is active while not actually in use or anything like that, to be honest. But if yes, these kinds of issues would be easy to fix via software update.
Will check the code and add a few more lines to the original post about this battery stuff.



It's the first time I saw this hardware wallet and it does look interesting. The wallet where looks like a mobile phone and you could have codes to bring you to a secret menu. That's amazing that you can play games on it but I don't get the idea of screenshots though.

Can you use the microSD as a key to using it as well? Not just having a Pin or code?
Well, let's say you're doing a workshop about Passport setup and usage for example, then you could have screenshots to insert into your presentation or something like that, I guess. Or maybe for Snake highscore simply. Wink
No, you can't use the microSD as a key, you need to use the PIN code. I also didn't talk about this since it can be found in the setup guide, but when you enter the first 4 PIN digits, it shows two words. If you don't recognize these words (should always be the same 2), you know this is not actually your device and you shall stop entering further numbers. It's then a trap designed to steal your PIN, right. If you were to just insert a microSD with the key, this mechanism wouldn't work and you could risk giving away your key to an attacker.



First, thank you (truly) for taking the time to write such a thorough review, and researching everything, and reading our support material and Github documentation. Not everyone does that.
Thank you for taking the time to reply and speak openly / acknowledging issues and explain reasoning behind decisions!
To be honest, I would have liked to research a bit more, also test multisig implementation and delve more into the code, but I only have so much time at the moment. Also I saw already a bunch of people successfully use multisig with the Passport, so didn't feel the need to test it just for the review.

In this case, we made some fairly hardcore security considerations that I think lessoned the overall quality and user experience. It's a balance, and I think we leaned too much on the security side for the Founder's Edition batch.
This is pretty on point, to be honest. Grin Like, I see how you went security over anything else in almost all aspects, and I generally commend it if a product has like a straight objective e.g. usability first, longevity first, or security (or another objective) 'first' and follows through. I still don't get the inclusion of the extras menu since everything else, especially the hardware, is so 'laser-focused' on security, even trading screen quality and battery life for security.

For the batteries, we chose AAA's very early on for a few reasons. We liked the security profile (they are 100% "dumb" with no chip inside), they are readily available across the world, and they allow for the device to operate in an airgapped manner.

What we didn't realize, though, is how bad normal AAA's are at holding their voltage. If the voltage dips too much, then Passport simply can't operate. So normal AAA's used with Passport aren't fully drained – they can be used in devices like remote controls – but they are too drained for Passport to handle.
Definitely agree, it was one of the main selling points for me. Wasn't it possible to make the circuit work at lower voltages like 1.3V (around the time when it shuts down) by boosting voltage or otherwise?

In hindsight, I think our AAA decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.
I don't think you necessarily had to move to Li-Ion though, if it was maybe somehow possible to design the circuit around Alkalines. You now have the added benefit of less thickness, but not sure that's so important.

We likewise made the screen decision primary for security reasons. The screen is a Sharp Memory LCD, the same type that is used by bunnie in his betrusted/Precursor project. The screen does not have an embedded chip, and instead has circuitry etched into the glass itself. This would, theoretically, make tampering more difficult. We consider this to be a "tamper evident" display.
Right, I see. I mean, now I see more why some choices were made (even though explanation about screen choice was given before buying & was actually a selling point). Basically, you went all-in on security on every hardware element, even if that meant a sacrifice in another aspect. I guess one can't have everything!

I think we leaned too much on the security considerations of the screen, and did not fully consider the quality/UX tradeoffs. A brighter LCD display would have made for a better QR code experience with computer webcams, and would have exuded quality.

In hindsight, I think our screen decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.
Honestly, same screen but with backlight and no scratches would have been fine as well - retaining security & improving the finish. But glass top of course is the best option. Not sure if that would have been possible on top of SHARP tamper-evident LCD.

We are deeply upset that this happened, and can assure you that next batches will have higher quality plastic.

Additionally, for Batch 2, we have moved to glass. As you mentioned in your review, that means it could shatter. But we are using glass with 6H hardness, which is on par with some versions of
Gorilla Glass. I've taken a razorblade to it and it hasn't scratched. So hopefully it will be a big improvement and a good tradeoff.
Sounds good!

Overall, I think Passport Batch 2 should address all of your concerns. We’ll be unveiling it in February.

It will offer a different set of tradeoffs between security and UX/quality. Hopefully most people will be comfortable with these tradeoffs. I know some will be upset about the new Lithium Ion battery, or the new screen, or the cover glass instead of plastic. (And we refund preorders in full if anyone is unhappy when we do the unveiling).
Exciting - February is not long from now. I understand; this time you are going more 'traditional' in a way with recessed, presumably non-tamper-evident screen and Li-Ion battery with proprietary chip.
I'm now wondering if you're considering re-releasing FE with maybe better plastic QC on the screen and other back cover colour (to distinguish from FE since it was limited to 1000 units) as the 'more secure' option while the new version would be the 'more usable' option for instance. So customers could have a choice to simply buy what they prefer.

I do think some people here would prefer getting the Passport with AAA's if the screen wasn't scratched from the factory over getting one with Li-Ions. Just an idea. I think Keystone / formerly Cobo Vault had choice options between AAA or Li-Ion.

Me personally, would choose v2 probably (though not seen yet), since this device seems like a 'daily driver' to me, only issue with that being the battery choice and perceived delicateness due to pre-scratched screen (though it doesn't seem too delicate while using). Also just this 'phone form factor' makes one want to put it into the pocket and carry it with you. Wink

Just a suggestion: Can we have a 'phone case' for FE and / or Version 2? Pretty please? Cheesy
Would prefer without clear part, just all fabric - since that's what I last used many years ago... (can't find images)

Actually, something like this is what I'm envisioning:


In general, a few accessories such as screen protectors, cases, kind of typical 'phone stuff' would somehow make sense for these devices, in my opinion! Maybe even replaceable back covers for customization.

Again, truly appreciate this review, as someone who has been lurking on-and-off on this site for a very long time it's humbling to see a post about our product.
I'm really surprised and excited you guys are lurking around here! If you check Hardware Wallets subforum from time to time, maybe there will be some ideas for future Foundation devices! Wink

PS: One more question; will both devices run the same firmware? If not, will new and old device's firmwares be developed and maintained in parallel?
GitHub has no repository for the new firmware, which makes me hope they run the same one; thus reducing codebase to maintain + elongating FE update support.
member
Activity: 58
Merit: 104
Hi, this is Zach from Foundation Devices.

First, thank you (truly) for taking the time to write such a thorough review, and researching everything, and reading our support material and Github documentation. Not everyone does that.

I think, overall, I largely agree with your review and takeaways. We are really proud of Passport Founder's Edition, especially as a new hardware startup with, at that time, a limited budget and 4-person founding team. But personally I think there were many things we could have improved with Founder's Edition. I think you accurately identified them.

As you may know, when you are making hardware, you have to lock in decisions months in advance to deal with lead times. The physical plastic and metal parts can take 3+ months to produce. You have to release the designs for tooling, then get back first articles (and sometimes numerous revisions), and then approve for production.

The same goes for the PCB design – we go through numerous prototypes and testing, and we have to lock the PCB component placement 3+ months in advance to align with the plastic/metal production schedule.

In this case, we made some fairly hardcore security considerations that I think lessoned the overall quality and user experience. It's a balance, and I think we leaned too much on the security side for the Founder's Edition batch.

Batteries

For the batteries, we chose AAA's very early on for a few reasons. We liked the security profile (they are 100% "dumb" with no chip inside), they are readily available across the world, and they allow for the device to operate in an airgapped manner.

What we didn't realize, though, is how bad normal AAA's are at holding their voltage. If the voltage dips too much, then Passport simply can't operate. So normal AAA's used with Passport aren't fully drained – they can be used in devices like remote controls – but they are too drained for Passport to handle.

We didn't realize this until later on, and by then it was too far along to pause everything and redo the electromechanical design. So we responded by canceling our order of normal AAAs, finding some sources for more expensive Lithium AAA's, and publishing a support guide that recommended an option of rechargeable lithium (constant voltage) AAA's to our users.

In hindsight, I think our AAA decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.

Screen

We likewise made the screen decision primary for security reasons. The screen is a Sharp Memory LCD, the same type that is used by bunnie in his betrusted/Precursor project. The screen does not have an embedded chip, and instead has circuitry etched into the glass itself. This would, theoretically, make tampering more difficult. We consider this to be a "tamper evident" display.

But the downside is that we needed to purchase the display with some kind of external light source. We chose to purchase a stock version, with frontlight, that was available from Digikey. We were able to place a bulk order.

Unfortunately, the frontlight quality was underwhelming, but it was the only viable thing we could ship with our lead times (we didn't have time or budget for a custom backlight). The lighting was not bright enough and uneven.

I think we leaned too much on the security considerations of the screen, and did not fully consider the quality/UX tradeoffs. A brighter LCD display would have made for a better QR code experience with computer webcams, and would have exuded quality.

In hindsight, I think our screen decision was a mistake, and we are rectifying this for Batch 2.

Plastic Quality

For customers who preordered a Passport Founder's Edition, we communicated this previously – we struggled a lot with our selected plastic supplier. This was the primary cause of our moderate shipping delays (about 2 months late). We had to do numerous revisions to the sample parts, and it was frustrating when after a few revisions we had to approve the plastic even though it wasn't perfect. It was either that or start all over again with a new supplier and at least 3 months of further delays.

The plastic issues consisted of marks on the front black housing and fine scratches on the clear plastic screen cover. Some were really bad, and at production we had to spend a lot of time sorting plastic front housings.

We later had the supplier send us another 1000 parts (free of charge) with a plastic film protecting the front cover. This helped a bit, so later Founder's Edition orders actually received slightly better plastic quality.

We are deeply upset that this happened, and can assure you that next batches will have higher quality plastic.

Additionally, for Batch 2, we have moved to glass. As you mentioned in your review, that means it could shatter. But we are using glass with 6H hardness, which is on par with some versions of
Gorilla Glass. I've taken a razorblade to it and it hasn't scratched. So hopefully it will be a big improvement and a good tradeoff.

Summary

Overall, I think Passport Batch 2 should address all of your concerns. We’ll be unveiling it in February.

It will offer a different set of tradeoffs between security and UX/quality. Hopefully most people will be comfortable with these tradeoffs. I know some will be upset about the new Lithium Ion battery, or the new screen, or the cover glass instead of plastic. (And we refund preorders in full if anyone is unhappy when we do the unveiling).

Again, truly appreciate this review, as someone who has been lurking on-and-off on this site for a very long time it's humbling to see a post about our product.
copper member
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1250
Try Gunbot for a month go to -> https://gunbot.ph
It's the first time I saw this hardware wallet and it does look interesting. The wallet where looks like a mobile phone and you could have codes to bring you to a secret menu. That's amazing that you can play games on it but I don't get the idea of screenshots though.

Can you use the microSD as a key to using it as well? Not just having a Pin or code?
legendary
Activity: 3458
Merit: 6231
Crypto Swap Exchange
I know we discussed the battery life or lack of it in another thread. Did you ever trace down what might have been pulling all that power? I think that they are powering the camera when not in use due to what I saw on the power feed when I had one in pieces but I only had it for a few minutes to test before it had to be handed back. It was not mine and they were shipping it back so I could not be sure and did not want to really bring it up till someone else was testing one.

I doubt it's easy to lower the price when it's still assembled in U.S which have high wage cost.
Slightly OT but wage cost on something like this should not be an issue. Even at $20 an hour + benefits it's a non issue.
Sidehack designed and built a complete miner for $300 https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/gekkoscience-terminus-r606-750gh-up-to-1th-quiet-miner-now-shipping-5131245
ColdCard is from Canada with higher and more expensive costs then the US in a lot of places and they have theirs for under $150.

-Dave
legendary
Activity: 2856
Merit: 7410
Crypto Swap Exchange
I didn't expect someone would review $299 device (excluding possible import tax and shipping cost). But with such high cost, i'm really annoyed they don't bother include rechargeable lithium AAA when they include industrial class microSD.

  • microSD: This is a method that the Passport itself offers, but I find very risky. As soon as you insert an SD card into a computer, basically any process and any unprivileged app running on it, that has filesystem access (most of them, even the browser..) can read and modify the contents of that SD card. It should be pretty easy to write a background program that waits for SD cards and replaces PSBT files on the fly.

IMHO, if people choose FE rather than other hardware wallet (such as Ledger and Trezor) which is cheaper and easier to use, it's more likely they have better secure practice. I wouldn't worry about malicious application which replace PBST file if you perform good security practice and verify the transaction before sign/broadcast process.

If they can fix the insufficient battery life, lower the price, and manage to create a HW that won't suffer major security issues and vulnerabilities in the future, this would be something I would consider purchasing for long-term storage. At the moment, it isn't.     

I doubt it's easy to lower the price when it's still assembled in U.S which have high wage cost.
legendary
Activity: 2730
Merit: 7065
Farewell, Leo. You will be missed!
Regarding the scratched screen. Does Passport have any recommendations on how to protect the device from further scratches? In the OP you mentioned that the curved screen makes it difficult to stick on a screen protector. I haven't really played with those things, so I don't know why that would be a problem.

A big no go to me is the batteries. The wallet itself is rather expensive + you are going to need a new set of batteries quite often. You only got 4 hours out of the ones that came with it? That's really bad performance-wise. The money you will spend on purchasing new batteries will be more than what you paid for the HW.

I see from your post that the second version will be shipped with Li-Ion batteries. Hopefully that can improve the stand-by time.
If they can fix the insufficient battery life, lower the price, and manage to create a HW that won't suffer major security issues and vulnerabilities in the future, this would be something I would consider purchasing for long-term storage. At the moment, it isn't.     
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Today, econoalchemist published his Foundation Passport usage guide!
I only quickly skipped over it, but it seems very thorough, so I'll leave this here.
It's a great addition to my two own posts, because he doesn't review it like me, while he does go very deep into the setup and usage process so it's definitely more a guide for newbies who just got it compared to a review; but surely still very helpful.
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/technical/how-to-use-passport-hardware-bitcoin-wallet

Also discovered an update by madman @zherbert on Twitter regarding the one user's broken screen. Grin
I'm not sure they would have put in so much effort if it would have been a random unknown Twitter user, but they even made a video mentioning the person with broken screen directly and showing that it seems pretty durable.
It's weird that the customer hasn't apparently replied to their replacement offers in multiple days, to be honest, after being so outraged in the first place.
https://twitter.com/zachherbert/status/1486108156061224961

From the artifacts seen on the screen, the price ($30 component) and the video demonstration, it seems Zach's guess of a misplaced screen connector is more realistic than the screen just failing after a few months.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Setup Walkthrough

Unboxing
The Foundation Passport comes in sort of two layers of 'tamper-evident seals' / stickers. This is how it should arrive (inside a larger box) at your doorstep.


They have a very well made, and still relatively short, setup guide, which should make it really foolproof not only to setup the device itself (later), but also goes through even the unboxing and explains what to verify (integrity of the stickers and such) when receiving the package. It is very well suited as a first wallet, even for newbies.

The setup guide can be found here and contains text as well as videos.

What's interesting is that they say:
We don’t save these codes except for the first few characters, which identify each batch of Passports. Founder's Edition batches begin with the following:
B722, B723, B732, B799

There is no way to verify the validity of such claims[them not saving codes] (no strong opinion for / against either way) and what I find funny is that they refer to these 4 batches of FE devices, but call the new wallet coming out in March 2022 'Batch 2'. So there will be a difference between 'Batch 2' (new device with rechargeable battery etc.) and 'second batch of Passport FE' (B723...). Confusing. Roll Eyes

Inside this box, there is the actual device's box which has a second tamper-evident seal, that I talked about before.

Both seals seem quite generic and like they could be bought from a random place & replaced in transit, however the inner box might be hard to source with logo and everything. Because of course, you can't break the seal and reuse the box, that would be visible. The outer box could easily be replaced for sure, though. But Foundation has additional technical mechanisms in place that I'll talk about later (boot counter, no 'resettability', supply chain validation).

Contents
The inner box is pretty well made and compact & can be used to keep the wallet safe in a closet or similar after being set up. Also has some space for spare batteries and micro SD cards (for PSBT!! don't store backups together with the device!).
You get a physical copy of the Bitcoin whitepaper, which from the styling resembles a bit a bible or other 'holy book', two stickers with the now old Foundation logo (future collectible? Wink) and a pretty postcard (not pictured here) as well as the standard thank you card with QR code to the above linked setup guide.


Setup QR code
QR code with link to setup webpage: https://docs.foundationdevices.com/en/setup-guide


Terms of use
I found it a bit amusing to read the terms of service only then, after buying this thing, waiting, opening two seals and starting a non-reversible setup process (hence no way of returning it or anything like that), but it was the next step in the setup process, so I read it through. Maybe read TOU before buying a wallet (in general) since they can't be returned in case you don't like em!

What I liked is that they're not very long and pretty straightforward. You also have to accept them on the actual device itself to continue, which I found interesting.

Of course, I disagree with this but I think they have to put it for legal reasons Grin
(f) Bitcoin do not constitute a currency, asset, security, negotiable instrument, or other form of property and do not have any intrinsic or inherent value;

Supply chain validation

During setup, you go through a so-called 'supply-chain validation' process. This is supposed to ensure that it hasn't 'been tampered with or swapped out with a malicious device before it got to you'[https://docs.foundationdevices.com/en/setup-guide#step-3-supply-chain-validation]. They do that by programming a key into the secure element.
Now, to be honest, I've got an issue with this. They introduce a single point of failure. They talk about how they have a dedicated, air-gapped laptop that is used to program all Passports with that key, it is done locally in the U.S. and the laptop is tightly monitored and everything like that. I'm also not entirely sure how other wallets make sure the device is untampered (maybe rely solely on seals?) and also not sure how it could be improved, but it seems odd to me with this 'magic laptop' and everything.

PIN Setup
The next step of the guide instructs to set a permanent device PIN. I'm interested in your opinions here; I think I didn't come across a basically non-resettable wallet so far like this.
There is no way to recover your PIN. We recommend that you write it down during this step and store it in a safe, secure location. If you choose to commit it to memory, make sure it is a combination of 6-12 digits that you will not forget.

It seems you can reset the seed but not the device PIN.
Erase Passport's seed so that you can create or restore a new seed.
For security reasons, this does not reset Passport to a factory-fresh state.

For example, when resetting the BitBox02, it also resets the device password. Maybe you're screaming at your screen right now that the BitBox is super insecure, in that case enlighten me in which scenario having a non-resettable device PIN would be more secure!

Firmware updates
I'm just continuing through the setup guide here, because in this step there are again a few things worth mentioning. Instead of any other device I had so far, they don't instruct how to or even recommend checking the sha256 checksum of the provided .bin file, instead you shall just write it to a microSD card and insert it. Before the Passport upgrades its firmware, it displays you the checksum on the screen.
I personally find this easier, especially for Windows users without shell access with preinstalled shasum command. Also, it kind of forces you to do it since it comes 'right in your face' while trying to upgrade.
However, there is no PGP key to import / verify against. I'm not sure this is needed though, since the firmware update file itself is signed and only runs if it has 2 out of 4 Foundation developer signatures. So in a way, it does check PGP, but just all on-device, opposed to doing that on the host before transferring the file.

One could also argue this method is more secure, because otherwise a virus on the host machine could replace the firmware last-minute after it was verified for PGP and SHA256, right before the microSD card is ejected. Maybe you could also write a virus that hooks into Windows' 'eject' function for example, to only then replace the .bin, which would make all the previous integrity checks void. Hence I really like the approach of checking this stuff on-device!


Seed setup
The last setup step is the setup of the seed. A seed could be imported (e.g. from a broken / old hw wallet you want to replace) or generated new. It uses an open source true random number generator, which I find pretty cool.
Passport uses an open source true random number generator (TRNG), called an avalanche noise source, in combination with other sources of randomness to generate a 24-word seed.
One thing I know a lot of people might not like is that you can read out the seed after initial setup by navigating through the advanced menu. What do you guys think about it? I find it practical to e.g. verify a day later that you copied it correctly, or when creating a second backup in the future, it's better / safer to copy directly from the 'origin' than 'copying a copy', right? But I see how it's a tradeoff where maybe someone could be forced to show the seed or something like that; on the other hand, we still have passphrases, so I don't know.

Contrary to other wallets, which sometimes save the seed in plaintext to the SD card, the Passport saves a backup file on the SD card which is encrypted with an additional password. I think many users will end up with too much stuff: a microSD card, a password, and maybe additionally a pure seed word backup. In my opinion, the latter is enough; however the more complex microSD card backup will have the advantage of being importable into a new Passport and retain settings, multisig configuration etc.

Many users are also worried about the longevity of microSD cards compared to laminated paper or metal seed backups. I agree that these are safer than an SD card as they're more resistant to water, dust, radiation, heat and cold, as well as even fire (if using metal).
Foundation does use an SD card from SanDisk's 'industrial' lineup. It seems these are much more temperature resistant than other models, so you could bury them outside and stuff like this without worries.
They can work in temperatures ranging from -40°F to 185°F for extended periods of time.
So for my metric friends, this is from -40°C to 85°C. Operating temperatures; so it can be used outside in most places of the world at most times of the year, which is great!


hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 5818
not your keys, not your coins!
Review

After owning the Foundation Devices Passport 'Founders Edition' for a few months, I would like to share my thoughts / experience!
I kept notes of stuff I tried so far, so I hope I'm not missing anything.

Full disclosure: I bought it completely with my own money, no contact to Foundation, no affiliation or anything and also preordered the "batch 2" (which is more a version 2 than a batch 2 due to all the announced changes), again out of my pocket. They did provide a 21% discount code and it costs 33% less than the founders edition by default ($199 vs $299), so with the code it comes into BitBox02-and-similar-territory (150ish) which I find a good / normal price for a hardware wallet. But I'll talk about it more later. I wouldn't have ordered it for $299 though, after my experience with v1.

TL;DR: It's good, but not $299 good, I think.
Still my current favourite wallet.

Pros:
  • Completely open source
  • Has secure element
  • Airgapped
  • Easy setup and usage
  • Compact size
  • Large screen
  • AAA batteries will always be around
  • Usable with any device that has a webcam
Cons:
  • Delicate screen (scratches)
  • Pretty dim screen brightness
  • Kind of need special batteries
  • Expensive



Features:

First impressions
My first impressions were pretty good: the device is relatively heavy, the material is soft to the touch and it's trying to feel like a 'premium' device. However, the screen has tiny scratches which are very annoying to see on such an expensive device. They are not noticeable in normal usage or when looking at it from a bit far away, but if you look closely it becomes apparent. At first, it seemed to me like a protective foil, but it doesn't have one (why??). The screen is also pretty dim; I'm not sure you can really use it in full sunlight for example.


Here, we see the tiny scratches on the screen's surface. I've got a note from my initial impressions that they somewhere mentioned / admitted themselves that somehow all or most FE's have little scratches like this, but can't find a reference to that information again right now. I also spoke to them and they reassured me that the new version will have an improved screen.


I don't understand wallet manufacturers when they make such an integral part of their admittedly mostly not cheap devices, so prone to wear and tear. I know I'm going on a tangent here, but I noticed this a lot - but tell me your opinions - hardware wallets often seem to have little thought into screen durability. Especially the newer, 'shiny' designs: BitBox02 has an easily scratchable screen (just after a few days of normal use and sitting in a drawer it was full of microscratches). Ledger Nano X also has a non-recessed screen (not tried it myself). And of course Foundation Passport here comes scratched. In my mind, these devices are kind of a semi-hot wallet, in that they allow you to do daily transactions easily and quickly, while also being a good option for long-term hodling (unlike e.g. a phone that you replace frequently). So durability has to be taken into account if you offer a product that is supposed to still be usable in 10 years time.[rant over]

It seems to me that the approach in Trezor One and Model T are your best bet: simply recess it into the device a bit and call it a day.
From experience with smartphones, anything plastic and shiny will scratch over time, while anything glass won't scratch but shatter.
Another option could be screen protectors. However, the curved screen on this wallet specifically, would make it tricky to achieve.

It's reassuring to see that Foundation is moving to a recessed screen in version two (but I'll have a segment on that later down):


It also seems to me like it didn't pick up any more 'new' scratches since I got it, so maybe it doesn't scratch from usage but only e.g. from being mishandled during production. However, I always kept it in its box, so there's that. I envisioned using it more as a daily driver (to throw into pocket or backpack) but the scratches and poor battery life discouraged me from trying that.

Size & shape
Yes, I am making a segment just about the size of this thing! It seems to me they got a lot of flak from people complaining it will be too large or too thick, that it looks outdated / old and stuff like that, before it was released. Let me tell you: This wallet is tiiiiny Cheesy Really, it looks much larger in pictures! It's smaller than an old phone for sure. Maybe draw it out on a piece of paper and cut it out to get an idea if you're unsure[that's what I did].

It does have the shape of an old Nokia, but I don't think it's a bad thing because it is an easy to use form factor for such a device. It makes it easy to input passphrases, PIN and also see a whole transaction on the screen without scrolling. It could also serve a bit for plausible deniability; it has no active 'pd feature' (like showing a contact list or stuff like that), but you could probably sign a transaction in the office and colleagues might think you're just playing around with an older phone.

Battery
The elephant in the room? Usage of AAA batteries! When I first read about it, I was excited. It made so much sense: the classic triple-A is around for over 100 years by now, and probably always will. So compared to Li-Ion rechargeable batteries, you can tuck this thing away somewhere for cold storage with (or without) a set of batteries and when you take it out in 10 or 20 years time, it will be easy to find batteries for it and access funds. Instead, a rechargeable Li-Ion battery will be dead by then and you may not be able to find a fitting charger. Imagine finding a 20 year old Nokia phone right now; would you know where to quickly get a charger for it? I don't know if we'll have micro-USB or even USB-C in 20 years, but we will have AAA batteries.



Now, one culprit we find is that this device only really works with Lithium batteries. Not Lithium-Ion, Lithium (non-rechargeable). An Alkaline will suffice for sure (e.g. in '20 years' scenario) to send a transaction or two, but the issue is their capacity drains super fast if you try pulling higher currents.
A typical Alkaline has 1200mAh, so you'd expect to pull 1.2A for 1h? Not gonna happen. It will happily give you 12mA for 100 hours, though. Hope that makes sense.
Alkaline batteries also discharge differently than Lithium ones. The latter hold a higher voltage longer, and then drop off quickly, while the former go down more linearly. That's why a 1.3V Lithium cell may be almost empty while a 1.3V Alkaline still has a lot of juice in it.


The Passport also doesn't play well with normal rechargeable (Li-Ion)NiMH cells, since these start at 1.3V and from my testing that's approximately where Passport stops working due to too low voltage.
This is one of the reasons the batteries don't hold that long: an Alkaline battery with 1.3V is still over 50% full, but the voltage is not high enough for the Passport. Hence, if using rechargeables, you need constant-voltage ones.

They explicitly recommend Lithium cells and also send a set of two; you can find more information on Lithium batteries on Wikipedia. Matter of fact though, they are very uncommon and expensive. The ones that came with my Passport lasted for probably 4h; while Alkalines last maybe 15 minutes or 30 tops.

Popularity
Lithium primary batteries account for 28% of all primary battery sales in Japan but only 1% of all battery sales in Switzerland. In the EU only 0.5% of all battery sales including secondary types are lithium primaries.

Another option are constant-voltage rechargeable Li-Ion cells. I honestly think these make more sense than buying non-rechargeable Lithium ones.
Rough prices:
  • 32x Alkaline: 15€
  • 16x Lithium: 30€
  • 4x rechargeable constant voltage (builtin charger): 25€
Since the Alkalines go flat so fast, I would probably get rechargeable ones instead of Lithium, since they can be reused so many times and still cost less than a 16 pack of Lithium cells. Also less pollution and less hassle of buying batteries regularly.

Edit: Due to suspicions about camera being on even while not scanning QR codes, thus draining batteries, I checked the code.
As we can see, the camera is only enabled when starting to scan.
Code:
async def ux_scan_qr_code(title):
    [~]
    # Create the Camera connection
    cam = Camera()
    cam.enable()

Security
I stated this once or twice before, but as of now, QR codes seem like the most secure communication method between hardware wallet and computer. Of course, there are many definitions and implementations of the term 'airgapped', but a few issues with other methods I'll present here.
  • Bluetooth: In BT, the whole stack is one 2000 page spec (and growing), so compared to WiFi which is only high layer, the spec alone is a mess already. It goes from application layer to physical layer, and has to cover everything. The implementations are even worse and security researchers find vulnerabilities in Bluetooth all the time, to the point that it's not even such an interesting research topic anymore.
  • Non-standard QR: Compared to Passport's standard PSBT QR codes, some other wallets use proprietary QR codes which bind you to the brand's own wallet app(s) and could include information you don't want to be transmitted between devices. Meanwhile you can photograph and control Passport's QR codes and verify it's just simply PSBT files encoded in QR.
  • NFC: Similarly to existing attacks on credit cards, NFC can be easily wormholed since it has no protections against it on the physical layer and you have to trust the implementation mitigates these risks on application layer (through timing etc.)
  • microSD: This is a method that the Passport itself offers, but I find very risky. As soon as you insert an SD card into a computer, basically any process and any unprivileged app running on it, that has filesystem access (most of them, even the browser..) can read and modify the contents of that SD card. It should be pretty easy to write a background program that waits for SD cards and replaces PSBT files on the fly.

It's pretty hard to middle-man a 'QR code connection'; I don't even know how such a setup could look like, but it would involve a lot of convincing someone to scan QR codes they don't know with their Bitcoin wallet app and having them scan another code with their HW wallet, which I find very unlikely to succeed. I'm not sure a completely passive attack scenario like in NFC or microSD even exists.

Hidden menu
For some reason, Foundation Devices thought it's a good idea to include unnecessary software in their firmware for a premium-priced, supposed high-end hardware wallet. I don't think anyone will secure $100 of BTC in a $300 device, but at the same time you wouldn't want to store large amounts on a device that has games on it, right?

It is accessed by typing these keys within 3 seconds, also known as 'Konami Code':


You can play Snake, Tetris and there is a fake Internet Explorer loading screen 'game'.
There is one useful feature though; it allows you to take screenshots which are saved to the microSD card.
I could imagine this useful for creating tutorials / educational material in different languages for example.

They argue that since it's all MicroPython code and no way the game influences anything during payments or other way round, no matter how you try to attack, I always prefer my code as 'lean' as possible, with as little stuff in it as I can. I think this is a security practice everyone should follow. After asking them via E-Mail, they unfortunately told me they aren't planning on a 'pure firmware' without these shenanigans unlike ShiftCrypto with their Bitcoin-only firmware.

However, you could transfer your own developer key onto the device and flash it with a self-compiled firmware without the games. https://github.com/Foundation-Devices/passport-firmware/blob/main/DEVELOPMENT.md As far as I know, when booting a developer firmware, it will show a disclaimer every time it boots so you know you're not running modified firmware, if you didn't flash it yourself.

Version two

I am not even sure how to call their new device. Looks cool! It will ship in two months from now roughly and as I said, I preordered it for a bit over 150 bucks which I find a fair price for such a device. I don't really like it being called 'batch 2', since it seems it'll really be more a new version / refresh than a second batch of the same device. It always sounded like after the founders edition there would be a 'normal edition' or so, maybe just other colours and small improvements. But with reduced price of $199 from $299 and 21% discount for FE customers, it's not too bad. Still I'm not a fan of 'punishing' early 'backers' of a project by immediately releasing the new version afterwards.
Since I just talked about batteries, one of the biggest changes will probably be the switch to a Li-Ion battery.
I don't think it's as well suited for a long-term cold storage solution, to be honest.



But I really like that it seems to be a standard size, commonly found (for a while and probably continuing) in a multitude of devices. I think I even had a phone once with this exact battery; it's probably available all over the web or literally from a phone if needed.
No, but user removable and replaceable, standard form factor.

One point to consider, though I'm not sure how big a risk this is, comes straight from them a while back:
And we do not trust most lithium ion batteries, which contain embedded chips running unknown firmware.

Discounts
I haven't seen many discounts by them so far, except the one for FE customers, but I just found that they do have independence day deals, so if you're interested in such a device but not in a hurry, summer's around the corner, right? Wink
Happy Independence Day Weekend! We proudly assemble Passport in the USA. Flag of United States
Use coupon code FREEDOM for $20 off through Monday!

Source & Reproducibility
I'm very content with how much information can be found on the GitHub. Down to every single resistor, there are BOMs and all kinds of file types needed to answer all hardware and software questions with a repository search and a bit of time.
Just also found out that its builds are confirmed reproducible by WalletScrutiny!
Jump to: