Wallet Logo

PTPWallet - Bitcoin, Ethereum,

Latest release: 1.0.1256 ( 8th April 2022 ) 🔍 Last analysed 25th May 2021 . No source for current release found
4.3 ★★★★★
352 ratings
10 thousand
4th December 2018

Jump to verdict 

Older reviews (show 0 of 1 reproducible)

Help spread awareness for build reproducibility

Please help us spread the word discussing transparency with PTPWallet - Bitcoin, Ethereum,  via their Twitter!

Do your own research!

Try out searching for "lost bitcoins", "stole my money" or "scammers" together with the wallet's name, even if you think the wallet is generally trustworthy. For all the bigger wallets you will find accusations. Make sure you understand why they were made and if you are comfortable with the provider's reaction.

If you find something we should include, you can create an issue or edit this analysis yourself and create a merge request for your changes.

The Analysis 

Update 2021-05-25: We had this app listed as custodial previously but now think they try to imply to be non-custodial. Absent source code, none of that is verifiable though, so the “not verifiable” verdict did not change.

In their FAQ we can read:

I entered/lost my passphrases and it’s giving me a message that I can’t access my account. What can I do?
Please double-check to make sure you implemented the passphrases correctly, without any spacing after the words, in the same numeric order, and make sure the grammar is correct (no autocorrects). In addition, make sure you aren’t missing a letter and no letters are capitalized.
A passphrase is an industry-standard tool that is the LAST LINE of protection for crypto accounts (be it in an exchange or a wallet). Due to security and privacy reasons, every company that has passphrase protection is unable to access the passphrases. Therefore, if you lose your passphrases or incorrectly wrote them down initially, then you will lose access to your account, and there is sadly nothing our company - nor any company - can do to regain access to your account.

which is a claim to be non-custodial but even then, other claims:

State-of-the-Art Security
Designed for simple digital asset management and to protect you against thieves and hackers, your digital assets are secured with this coin base wallet. 6-word passphrase and PIN Code protection, asks you for PIN Code every time you open your cryptocurrency wallet and make transactions.

make us wonder how much in control the user is, as “6 words” is not an industry standard.

Custodial or not, absent source code their claims are anyway not verifiable.

(lw)

Verdict Explained

Without public source of the reviewed release available, this product cannot be verified!

As part of our Methodology, we ask:

No Source!

Is the source code publicly available?

If the answer is "no", we mark it as "No source for current release found".

A wallet that claims to not give the provider the means to steal the users’ funds might actually be lying. In the spirit of “Don’t trust - verify!” you don’t want to take the provider at his word, but trust that people hunting for fame and bug bounties could actually find flaws and back-doors in the wallet so the provider doesn’t dare to put these in.

Back-doors and flaws are frequently found in closed source products but some remain hidden for years. And even in open source security software there might be catastrophic flaws undiscovered for years.

An evil wallet provider would certainly prefer not to publish the code, as hiding it makes audits orders of magnitude harder.

For your security, you thus want the code to be available for review.

If the wallet provider doesn’t share up to date code, our analysis stops there as the wallet could steal your funds at any time, and there is no protection except the provider’s word.

“Up to date” strictly means that any instance of the product being updated without the source code being updated counts as closed source. This puts the burden on the provider to always first release the source code before releasing the product’s update. This paragraph is a clarification to our rules following a little poll.

We are not concerned about the license as long as it allows us to perform our analysis. For a security audit, it is not necessary that the provider allows others to use their code for a competing wallet. You should still prefer actual open source licenses as a competing wallet won’t use the code without giving it careful scrutiny.

The product cannot be independently verified. If the provider puts your funds at risk on purpose or by accident, you will probably not know about the issue before people start losing money. If the provider is more criminally inclined he might have collected all the backups of all the wallets, ready to be emptied at the press of a button. The product might have a formidable track record but out of distress or change in management turns out to be evil from some point on, with nobody outside ever knowing before it is too late.