I stick to metamask because it's reputed, and every single dapp supports it as it's maiden web3 wallet. I have Taho [1] installed too as it works with Ledger on mobile, while metamask doesn't but it remains primary nonetheless.
[1] https://taho.xyz/
Topic: Web3 wallet trading alternatives you recommend? (Read 183 times)
With a wide variety of Web3 wallets in the market today, popular and widely-used wallets like Metamask, Trust Wallet etc have paved the way for an open and fair internet, but could they be all-sufficient?
I guess so, I am not into those but if those are the known wallets that supports web3 projects/tokens then that's what you must use. But my sentiment on these, if you treat your assets highly and you want the best security then I'll choose to keep it on my hardware wallet. As long as it is supported by a hardware wallet.
As we know the innovations in this industry are boundless so I tend to tilt towards exploring options, recently alternating Metamask and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
I don't know about bitkeep, I thought that you just mistyped it and talking about bitkey. Anyway, most wallets have their own cons and pros but since trust wallet was mentioned, you should think of it because just like the others it has got bad reviews.No lol he actually didn't mistyped. There's Bitkeep wallet. It was upgraded to Bitget's wallet. Quote user-friendly and supports a considerable amount of cryptocurrencies.
Yeah, it's actually great for beginners as a starter wallet. Their NFT Market should be among the largest on BNB Chain and Polygon, with many NFT new collections and good trading volume.
With a wide variety of Web3 wallets in the market today, popular and widely-used wallets like Metamask, Trust Wallet etc have paved the way for an open and fair internet, but could they be all-sufficient?
I guess so, I am not into those but if those are the known wallets that supports web3 projects/tokens then that's what you must use. But my sentiment on these, if you treat your assets highly and you want the best security then I'll choose to keep it on my hardware wallet. As long as it is supported by a hardware wallet.
As we know the innovations in this industry are boundless so I tend to tilt towards exploring options, recently alternating Metamask and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
I don't know about bitkeep, I thought that you just mistyped it and talking about bitkey. Anyway, most wallets have their own cons and pros but since trust wallet was mentioned, you should think of it because just like the others it has got bad reviews.No lol he actually didn't mistyped. There's Bitkeep wallet. It was upgraded to Bitget's wallet. Quote user-friendly and supports a considerable amount of cryptocurrencies.
I have used Metamask for all the years I have spent using web3 and that's my personal recommendation to anyone. It does what it says and that's what you want in the end of the day.
It's easy to use, have a lot of resources available on the internet. Make sure you do not try to contact anyone who says they are from Team Metamask. No one will ever contact you from their team and it's a most likely a scammer. Good Luck!
It's easy to use, have a lot of resources available on the internet. Make sure you do not try to contact anyone who says they are from Team Metamask. No one will ever contact you from their team and it's a most likely a scammer. Good Luck!
Aside from Metamask, Trust Wallet, etc., I think you guys should check out Gnosis Safe which is a multi-sig smart contract wallet.
For every transaction, it needs some certain wallet addresses to approve a transaction for that smart contract wallet. It’s like multiple EVM-compatible wallets are in a “joint account” under a certain smart contract wallet address in Gnosis Safe.
It’s ideal for securing your funds long term if you cannot afford to buy hardware wallets like Ledger, Trezor, etc.
For every transaction, it needs some certain wallet addresses to approve a transaction for that smart contract wallet. It’s like multiple EVM-compatible wallets are in a “joint account” under a certain smart contract wallet address in Gnosis Safe.
It’s ideal for securing your funds long term if you cannot afford to buy hardware wallets like Ledger, Trezor, etc.
With a wide variety of Web3 wallets in the market today, popular and widely-used wallets like Metamask, Trust Wallet etc have paved the way for an open and fair internet, but could they be all-sufficient?
I guess so, I am not into those but if those are the known wallets that supports web3 projects/tokens then that's what you must use. But my sentiment on these, if you treat your assets highly and you want the best security then I'll choose to keep it on my hardware wallet. As long as it is supported by a hardware wallet.
As we know the innovations in this industry are boundless so I tend to tilt towards exploring options, recently alternating Metamask and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
I don't know about bitkeep, I thought that you just mistyped it and talking about bitkey. Anyway, most wallets have their own cons and pros but since trust wallet was mentioned, you should think of it because just like the others it has got bad reviews. 
Like most of the opinions here, I cannot advise you on any of the available options, especially since most of them are recent and I have not tested most of their functions. The two most secure options, according to my experience, are MetaMask and Trust Wallet: the first is MetaMask, which is open source and works efficiently since its launch, and there are no complaints about it, in addition to the fact that most service sites support it, which means it is enough to use this wallet to be able to benefit from many other services without the need to register account or identification. The second is Trust Wallet, which is the wallet of Binance, which supports its security. It is a closed source wallet but gives users the possibility to export the private keys of their addresses on the wallet.
As always, I advise you to do a little more research before choosing either.
As always, I advise you to do a little more research before choosing either.
You do not need to test it as it has been proven that this wallet is close source and is non-custodial. The only thing that it differs from MetaMask is its ability to support multiple cryptocurrencies. In the end it is better to avoid such wallet. We recently saw how Atomic Wallet got compromised and how wallets users suffered. It is better to follow the ground rules of choosing a wallet which has been advocated numerous times on this forum.
As for the element of protection, each system has its loopholes. Therefore, the necessary precautions must be taken while dealing with any of the types of wallets. One of the best solutions, in my opinion, is to use the Ledger wallet because it is safe and can hold cryptocurrencies on almost all networks, and then use decentralized trading platforms to do the exchange. This is the safest solution, despite its slightly complexities.
Like most of the opinions here, I cannot advise you on any of the available options, especially since most of them are recent and I have not tested most of their functions. The two most secure options, according to my experience, are MetaMask and Trust Wallet: the first is MetaMask, which is open source and works efficiently since its launch, and there are no complaints about it, in addition to the fact that most service sites support it, which means it is enough to use this wallet to be able to benefit from many other services without the need to register account or identification. The second is Trust Wallet, which is the wallet of Binance, which supports its security. It is a closed source wallet but gives users the possibility to export the private keys of their addresses on the wallet.
As always, I advise you to do a little more research before choosing either.
As always, I advise you to do a little more research before choosing either.
You do not need to test it as it has been proven that this wallet is close source and is non-custodial. The only thing that it differs from MetaMask is its ability to support multiple cryptocurrencies. In the end it is better to avoid such wallet. We recently saw how Atomic Wallet got compromised and how wallets users suffered. It is better to follow the ground rules of choosing a wallet which has been advocated numerous times on this forum.
Like most of the opinions here, I cannot advise you on any of the available options, especially since most of them are recent and I have not tested most of their functions. The two most secure options, according to my experience, are MetaMask and Trust Wallet: the first is MetaMask, which is open source and works efficiently since its launch, and there are no complaints about it, in addition to the fact that most service sites support it, which means it is enough to use this wallet to be able to benefit from many other services without the need to register account or identification. The second is Trust Wallet, which is the wallet of Binance, which supports its security. It is a closed source wallet but gives users the possibility to export the private keys of their addresses on the wallet.
As always, I advise you to do a little more research before choosing either.
As always, I advise you to do a little more research before choosing either.
As we know the innovations in this industry are boundless so I tend to tilt towards exploring options, recently alternating Metamask and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
Stick to Open source noncustodial wallets and avoid anything close sourced for keeping your funds. You shouldn't even be talking about trustwallet or Bitkeep here. The recent incidents should be one of the reasons you should never use close sourced walletsExamples:
1. https://community.trustwallet.com/t/browser-extension-wasm-vulnerability-postmortem/750787
2. https://hacken.io/discover/atomic-wallet-hack/
I personally haven't used Bitkeep first hand, but I've seen some good reviews about it in comparison with trustwallet. I'm going to provide the link below so you can see for yourself. I actually just installed it, but I'm yet to make any settings hence why I can't give a personal review. I also barely use trust wallet. I know I'm going to get crucified by crypto lords if they find out that I actually do leave my asset on the exchange I use. Lol please do your own research
https://slashdot.org/software/comparison/Bitget-Wallet-vs-Trust-Wallet/
As we know the innovations in this industry are boundless so I tend to tilt towards exploring options, recently alternating Metamask and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
Stick to Open source noncustodial wallets and avoid anything close sourced for keeping your funds. You shouldn't even be talking about trustwallet or Bitkeep here. The recent incidents should be one of the reasons you should never use close sourced walletsExamples:
1. https://community.trustwallet.com/t/browser-extension-wasm-vulnerability-postmortem/750787
2. https://hacken.io/discover/atomic-wallet-hack/
-snip-
You are right about the upgrading part, but it appears the purpose is to refine the general user experience and bridge the gap between DeFi and CeFi. If BitKeep was close source as you mentioned, maybe by successfully bridging this gap through the upgrade, the upgraded Bitget wallet will shift to an open-source ecosystem. What do you think?
You are right about the upgrading part, but it appears the purpose is to refine the general user experience and bridge the gap between DeFi and CeFi. If BitKeep was close source as you mentioned, maybe by successfully bridging this gap through the upgrade, the upgraded Bitget wallet will shift to an open-source ecosystem. What do you think?
A centralized exchange making their wallet open source? I highly doubt that. They would've probably closed-sourced it, even if it was open before. And looking at their GitHub repository: https://github.com/BitgetLimited/
It doesn't look like they are a fan of "open source" projects, they just have their SDK there.
and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
Bitkeep Seems to be rebranded as Bitget recently.
And it turns out to be the wallet is closed source (correct me if I am wrong) so I will not suggest you to use because crypto community is always adviced to go with the things that are open sources so as mentioned by OmegaStarScream the unstoppable wallet1 is best for multi-crypto storage and they are open sourced2.
1. https://unstoppable.money/
2. https://github.com/horizontalsystems
and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
Bitkeep Seems to be rebranded as Bitget recently.
And it turns out to be the wallet is closed source (correct me if I am wrong) so I will not suggest you to use because crypto community is always adviced to go with the things that are open sources so as mentioned by OmegaStarScream the unstoppable wallet1 is best for multi-crypto storage and they are open sourced2.
1. https://unstoppable.money/
2. https://github.com/horizontalsystems
What I found about BitKeep is that is more user friendly than Metamask wallet as I believe operating Metamask is not that easy if you are a newbie to cryptocurrency. The red flag for me is that BitKeep is a closed source wallet wherein it can cause issues in the long run. dApps integration is not that good if you compare it with Metamask wallet. Another red flag for me is that BitKeep is a custodial wallet whereas Metamask is not. I would still prefer Metamask over BitKeep due to these factors and I do not feel uncomfortable in using Metamask as I have been using it for a long time now. I would always recommend others to use Metamask than BitKeep.
It really depends on what you're looking for. If you want something reliable that has been around for many years, and you know that developers won't abandon, then I would stick to MetaMask. An (open source) alternative with BTC support and a better UI: Unstoppable wallet.
Now, if you want something more innovative with Erc4337 support, multi-sig, etc. then you should probably into some of these options[2]. Just keep in mind that most of these services are new, and not open source.
[1] https://www.erc4337.io/
[2] https://www.alchemy.com/best/smart-contract-wallets
Now, if you want something more innovative with Erc4337 support, multi-sig, etc. then you should probably into some of these options[2]. Just keep in mind that most of these services are new, and not open source.
[1] https://www.erc4337.io/
[2] https://www.alchemy.com/best/smart-contract-wallets
With a wide variety of Web3 wallets in the market today, popular and widely-used wallets like Metamask, Trust Wallet etc have paved the way for an open and fair internet, but could they be all-sufficient?
As we know the innovations in this industry are boundless so I tend to tilt towards exploring options, recently alternating Metamask and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
As we know the innovations in this industry are boundless so I tend to tilt towards exploring options, recently alternating Metamask and BitKeep. What are your reviews about the later? and other reliable options you might suggest?
Jump to: