Topic: Speculation: New Trezor Product Coming on 14 June - page 2. (Read 1016 times)

The secure element is important but not crucial to your security. The SE chip protects against physical manipulation of the device. However, if someone has control of your Trezor, you have already done something really wrong to allow that control, and you should think about moving your coins elsewhere asap, regardless how robust the hardware wallet's security is.

There are a few differences between your Model One and the Trezor Safe 3:
- As I mentioned already, Safe 3 features a secure element chip, Model One doesn't.
- You enter passphrases on the Safe 3, but for Model One, you must enter them in Trezor Suite on your computer. That's less secure.
- You can take advantage of Trezor's new 20-word seed backup scheme and multi-share backups. This isn't available on Model One.

Perhaps it is just me, but I still find myself to be fond of the classical model Trezor One, it just feels more discreet and less luxurious than it's predecessors, I don't know.
Besides, in my opinion, I am not sure the new features are worth the premium one would end up paying for the new model...
Do you believe having a secure element within the device is a must or it would be solved by having a strong enough passphrase and adding ones recovery seed well enough?

Some months ago I was considering to get the Trezor Safe 3, because it kind of an evolution of the original Trezor one, but in retrospective if I am only into BTC and do not plan to get money into Montero or Cardano, there is no reason to spend an extra.

Thoughts?

The SD card encryption has its use. I wouldn't mind taking advantage of it if I had it on my Trezor One. If you knew the PIN code of my Trezor, you would be able to unlock it and steal all my crypto if you had physical access to the device. However, If it was protected with an SD card, you wouldn't be able to unlock it even if you knew the PIN without the second factor - the SD card. It provides users with that one extra line of defense like you say.

The conclusion is obvious: why buy the same thing at double the price?

And I, as a potential buyer, would like manufacturers to listen to my needs and try to meet demand. Otherwise, what is the point of business if not to satisfy customers?

Not at all, no, completely serious. I believe that manufacturers could produce the same Trezor Safe 5 in two modifications:
1) with a basic minimal configuration, which will not have Bluetooth, an SD card slot and other unnecessary little things for those who do not need extra functionality. And accordingly, a little cheaper in cost. I personally would take exactly this one.
2) advanced maximum configuration for those who need all this functionality.

I can imagine that both product lines would find their customers.

The stripped-down and full versions could be produced on the same device base (in order to save production), with the only difference being that bluetooth, an SD card slot, and the like would be physically removed.

Many people will not want to buy a device just because of the built-in Bluetooth (insert your own reason), which is why the company loses customers and profits. I'm not suggesting that manufacturers fulfill every whim of their clients, but creating hardware wallets with major / minor models doesn't seem to me something extra-impossible and extra-complicated.

Yeah, SDcard is just adding extra layer of protection, but that is not needed so much since Trezor Safe 5 added secure element.
Unless you really want touch screen that makes typing easier on bigger screen, there is no real reason why anyone should upgrade from Trezor Safe 3.
There is however one more internal change I found while watching this video, Trezor added new improved microcontroller STM32U5 that replaced older model STM32F4.
Both microcontrollers are coming from the same manufacturer STMicroelectronics.

 

Trezor doesn't supports PSBTs like airgapped hardware wallets. My guess is that the SD card serves the same function as on Trezor Model T. It pairs with the device and encrypts it, allowing access to the Trezor only after entering the configured PIN code.

CryptoGuide released first video for new Trezor Safe 5 device, with unboxing, setup guide and review.
You can see that size is almost identical with Trezor Model T,  and it is slightly bigger than Trezor Safe 3.
Touchscreen might be more interesting than I expected, it works similar like on smartphones with swipe up.
ANother important thing to say is that MiscroSD card doesn't work like in other hardware wallet for independent sign of transaction, it is used only for additional protection.
Some software wallets still don't recognize Trezor Safe 5 but that will change soon.


https://youtu.be/H57nl-1O65Y

As a responsible consumer, you should recognize this and draw appropriate conclusions, shouldn't you!


Well, didn't expect 'em to ask me. And I'm sure some would complain if no Bluetooth connectivity is there.

I would say some hardware wallets have Bluetooth because of Apple's hassle with their Lightning connector or limited USB-functionality on newer Apple mobile devices. And probably the Android camp has also fucked something up that developers bite the dust and piggy-back on Bluetooth, too. No particular camp bashing in mind...

I'm just a crazy guy who doesn't want to use a wallet with more than pocket money on a mobile device. I mostly don't need to use a hardware wallet on my mobile device, YMMV. I consider Bluetooth a security risk and therefore a feature to avoid.


Do I smell some irony here or traces of elements of S, Ar, Ca, Sm?

Different people have different needs and a manufacturer can't please everybody. As long as there're different product options and some diversity in the product space by other manufacturers.


While there're not terribly many other choices in this product category from other manufacturers, it should be possible to find a product that causes the least pain. 
(I'm mostly happy with my BitBox02. It doesn't tick all boxes of my wishlist but that's no problem.)

Of course not. Trezor, like any other hardware wallet manufacturer, makes money by selling its products. If their customers don't buy their hardware wallets every couple of years, Trezor won't make the money they need and want. They can hardly expect a constant influx of new users who buy a device for the first time and only one time. So, they have to sell a new gadget to their existing userbase every couple of years to remain profitable. They will introduce just enough new features and options to call it a new device that provides you with something extra, but nothing too fancy that will last forever. And in 2, 3, or 5 years, they will press repeat and do it all over again. 

This is exactly what will most likely happen, because in the era of irrational consumption, artificial obsolescence (in the case of your watches, firmware) and marketing (the pursuit of constant profit growth), it is profitable for manufacturers to make sure that in a couple of years the device turns into a useless, non-functional “brick” . The new Safe 5 is a product of the same era. Take a look, functionally, this device does not offer anything revolutionary new compared to the previous model, but it costs 2 times more.

I would not expect durable hardware wallet and therefore, prepare money in your pockets.


But Trezor forgot to ask you about this.

A manufacturer who listens to the opinions of its customers would make a fortune.

But it seems to me that there is no choice as such, because manufacturers offer to buy only what they have. Either buy it or don't buy it. Is this a choice?

The Bluetooth spec is a complicated monster, a few thousand pages, and thus usually an implementation nightmare full of bugs and security issues. I don't want this in a hardware wallet.

I also don't want built-in obsolescense, be it the Bluetooth chip or the built-in and in many cases not easily replaceable required battery.

Such hardware design features make my choice process easy: does it have Bluetooth or other stupid gimmicks? I don't buy it.

I am not thrilled with bluetooth support in any devices, especially not in hardware wallets, and it's not only a security issue.
Problem is that bluetooth chips are constantly making changes and improvements, so in just few years we can have unusable hardware wallets that have bluetooth only on paper.
Proof that I am not making wild assumptions is g-shock gb-5600 watches from 2012/2013 that had basic bluetooth support, now they can't be used because app is discontinued and firmware for chip can't be updated.
I hope this won't happen to (expensive) Bluetooth hardware wallets.

When Trezor Safe 5 was not released yet, I tried to guess what the new hardware wallet from Trezor would look like by taking the image source at:
https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/642fb2190d1edeee907e470b/66548e14a1a16508cba1522a_TS5_rotation_green_v2_0108%203-p-800.png

I got the link from https://content.trezor.io/new-products-2024, and from the file name, there is a clue to the name of the hardware wallet: TS5.

Then, I tried adjusting the image levels. Here are the results:


My assumption then was that the shape would still be similar to the Trezor Safe 3, and the picture above is the side part, while the bottom part looks like a slightly conical curved part.

Yes, two out of three GitHub issues ^[open] with the following label are referring to Bluetooth, so it's safe to say they're going down that path ^{[at least for the next one (unfortunately)]}:
^{- FWIW, based on how they've labeled their devices, I expect the next one to come with a new form factor.}

• Quote from: SFR10 on June 15, 2024, 02:32:46 PM
  T3W1
  

No, but people expect them to make one airgapped device and they are already preparing several new wallets, so there is chance they will do it.

Latest news I heard from them in 2023 was that first version of Tropic Square chip should be available in 2025.
That means that new hardware wallet with that chip can't be released before that happens, but I secretly hoped they would somehow managed to speed things up with Safe 5, and I was wrong.

Are you sure about that?

Same here, but considering their CEO mentioned in the past that production would happen sometime this year, I was expecting/hoping to see it in their latest product so I guess there was a minor setback.

• Quote from: dkbit98 on June 20, 2024, 12:36:19 PM
  but I hopping to see Trezor making a good airgapped device as alternative for Passport and Keystone wallets.
  
  Unfortunately, the next one appears to be getting a Bluetooth upgrade, so it's not going to be fully air-gapped ^{[regardless of them allowing users to turn it off in SW/HW]}.
  

No, not to my knowledge ^{[unfortunately]}.

Imagine a combination of the two: An almost perfectly open-source secure element chip on board an airgapped hardware wallet with top features and quality materials. That would be a device worth paying a premium price for. I am of the same opinion as you that one of their upcoming hardware wallets will feature the new Tropic Square SE chip. Still, time is needed to see how good this product is against all sorts of manipulations (open-sourced or not). Has Trezor ever made any hints that they are considering developing an airgapped hardware wallet?

I bet one of those devices is going to be with Tropic Square chip, but I hopping to see Trezor making a good airgapped device as alternative for Passport and Keystone wallets.
Some healthy competition is always good and it will push other manufacturers to make more improvements and innovations.

No they didn't.
You simply saw what you wanted to see, and it's not like they promised anything with that teaser.

They published  image (rotated! on their initial advertising  page) with  the artifact. Two options are here. 1) They done it intentionally to cheat consumers. 2) Their web developers are ignorant and irresponsible guys. Neither of two would add the credit to this company. Still, I believe that the opt 1) is more realistic.

You're right, but I was referring to the time gap between releasing Safe 3 and Safe 5... Before the release of Safe 3, there were a bunch of home screen screenshots ^{[or something like that]} of Safe 3 with another unknown device that looked like Model T ^{[unfortunately, I couldn't find it in their Git repo]} and apart from that, back when X was still Twitter, they hinted at the possibility of releasing another device ^{[hard to find, sorry]} and lastly, they've always been open about it on their subreddit ^{[e.g. New hardware , or updated model t?]}.

• BTW, just noticed there are two more labels on their GitHub repository, so I think it's safe to say that we're going to get two more devices within the next few years:
  ^{- I have mixed feelings about the gap becoming smaller for each major release, but it's better than nothing.}
  
  T1B1 legacy = Model One
  T2T1 = Model T
  T2B1 = Safe 3/Model R
  T3T1 = Safe 5
  T3W1 = ?
  T3B1 = ?