As the founder of Slow Fog, Yu Xian has long publicly analyzed risks related to phishing, counterfeit devices, and supply chains for hardware wallets, previously warning about methods that lure users into inputting mnemonic phrases with fake Ledger devices. Mindao, the founder of dForce, participated in the early construction of DeFi protocols and has focused on system design boundaries after security incidents.

After the dealer incident, Yu Xian proposed disassembly self-destruction as a default protection, shifting resource investment towards proving physical integrity. Mindao, on the other hand, emphasizes the verification capability of removable designs against circuit diagrams, arguing that self-destruction would close off verification paths. The two approaches correspond to design choices of "destruction is irreversible" and "openness allows for comparison."

Similar discussions can be seen in other secure hardware fields, such as the trade-offs between anti-tampering and auditability in some USB security tokens or modules, as well as the design of consumer electronics that allow for open disassembly for repair and verification. The current hardware wallet industry is transitioning from reliance on secure components and official channel trust to a stage where it must address supply chain implants and independent user verification.

Essentially, this is a choice of technical path: the core contradiction of hardware wallets lies in the verification loop between private key protection and device physical integrity. The mechanism requires that the mnemonic must be displayed in plaintext on the screen once, allowing attackers to implant bypasses before delivery; disassembly self-destruction can prevent post-modification but simultaneously hinders user verification, while open designs allow for checking against official materials for additional modules, ultimately pushing manufacturers to redistribute trust boundaries between "anti-tampering" and "verifiable."

ABAB News · Cognitive Law

Self-destruction proves non-removable, also proves non-verifiable
Removability is a risk, but also a verification right
Ordinary users cannot understand circuit diagrams, so trust stops at the packaging