Wallet Logo

BitPay - Bitcoin Wallet & Card

Latest release: 12.12.0 ( 19th May 2022 ) 🔍 Last analysed 2nd November 2022 . No source for current release found
4 ★★★★★
1481 ratings
24th October 2016

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 BitPay - Bitcoin Wallet & Card  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 

(Analysis from Android review)

Update 2022-11-02: The two issues about not being able to build this product did not get any attention from the provider but what’s sadly even worse: The version 14.7.4 has no published source code. This product is not verifiable.

Updated Review

Emanuel tried to build the version: 12.6.4 and check the build’s reproducibility or if not, see the diff.

Containerfile used:

FROM ubuntu:rolling

RUN set -ex; \
    mkdir -p /usr/share/man/man1/; \
    apt-get update; \
    DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive apt-get install --yes -o APT::Install-Suggests=false --no-install-recommends \
        npm \
        git \
        wget \
        unzip \
        gradle \
        python2 \
        make \
        g++ \        
        openjdk-8-jdk ; \
    rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*; \
    useradd -ms /bin/bash appuser;

USER appuser

ENV ANDROID_SDK_ROOT="/home/appuser/app/sdk" \
    ANDROID_HOME="/home/appuser/app/sdk" \
    NODE_ENV="development"

RUN set -ex; \
    mkdir -p "/home/appuser/app/sdk/licenses" "/home/appuser/app/bitpay/"; \
    printf "\n24333f8a63b6825ea9c5514f83c2829b004d1fee" > "/home/appuser/app/sdk/licenses/android-sdk-license"; \
    cd /home/appuser/app/bitpay/; \
    wget https://github.com/bitpay/wallet/archive/refs/tags/v12.6.4.zip; \
    unzip v12.6.4.zip; \
    git clone https://github.com/bitpay/wallet/; \
    cd /home/appuser/app/bitpay/wallet-12.6.4;

Compiled with:

podman build --pull --rm -t bitpay_build_apk_new -f Containerfile

Run with:

podman run --rm --name bitpay_build_apk -ti bitpay_build_apk

in container running npm install or npm ci or npm audit fix fails with the error:

npm ERR! ../src/create_string.cpp:17:37: error: no matching function for call to 'v8::String::Utf8Value::Utf8Value(v8::Local<v8::Value>&)'
npm ERR!    17 |   v8::String::Utf8Value string(value);
npm ERR!       |                                     ^
npm ERR! In file included from /home/appuser/.node-gyp/12.21.0/include/node/node.h:67,
npm ERR!                  from ../../nan/nan.h:56,
npm ERR!                  from ../src/create_string.cpp:1:
npm ERR! /home/appuser/.node-gyp/12.21.0/include/node/v8.h:3135:5: note: candidate: 'v8::String::Utf8Value::Utf8Value(v8::Isolate*, v8::Local<v8::Value>)'
npm ERR!  3135 |     Utf8Value(Isolate* isolate, Local<v8::Value> obj);
npm ERR!       |     ^~~~~~~~~
npm ERR! /home/appuser/.node-gyp/12.21.0/include/node/v8.h:3135:5: note:   candidate expects 2 arguments, 1 provided
npm ERR! make: *** [binding.target.mk:129: Release/obj.target/binding/src/create_string.o] Error 1
npm ERR! gyp ERR! build error 
npm ERR! gyp ERR! stack Error: `make` failed with exit code: 2
npm ERR! gyp ERR! stack     at ChildProcess.onExit (/home/appuser/app/bitpay/wallet-12.6.4/node_modules/node-gyp/lib/build.js:262:23)
npm ERR! gyp ERR! stack     at ChildProcess.emit (events.js:314:20)
npm ERR! gyp ERR! stack     at Process.ChildProcess._handle.onexit (internal/child_process.js:276:12)
npm ERR! gyp ERR! System Linux 5.12.15-300.fc34.x86_64
npm ERR! gyp ERR! command "/usr/bin/node" "/home/appuser/app/bitpay/wallet-12.6.4/node_modules/node-gyp/bin/node-gyp.js" "rebuild" "--verbose" "--libsass_ext=" "--libsass_cflags=" "--libsass_ldflags=" "--libsass_library="
npm ERR! gyp ERR! cwd /home/appuser/app/bitpay/wallet-12.6.4/node_modules/node-sass
npm ERR! gyp ERR! node -v v12.21.0
npm ERR! gyp ERR! node-gyp -v v3.8.0
npm ERR! gyp ERR! not ok 
npm ERR! Build failed with error code: 1

This app has failed to build. Link to the Github thread.

Old Review 2019-11-29

BitPay – Secure Bitcoin Wallet links to its source code on their Google Play app description.

Bitpay is the first wallet here that uses Angular and we are not most familiar with it. Our standard being “easily reproducible” means it is on the wallet provider to also provide clear instructions on how to build the app and the most straight forward way to well define the environment would be to explain it in code, using a Docker containers for example.

Bitpay does not advertise reproducibility for their builds and neither describes well how to build the app at all and so we are stuck after running npm install with this error message:

npm ERR! code ELIFECYCLE
npm ERR! errno 1
npm ERR! secp256k1@1.1.5 install: `node-gyp rebuild`
npm ERR! Exit status 1
npm ERR!
npm ERR! Failed at the secp256k1@1.1.5 install script.
npm ERR! This is probably not a problem with npm. There is likely additional logging output above.

npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR!     /home/name/.npm/_logs/2019-11-09T21_53_17_873Z-debug.log
[ERROR] An error occurred while running subprocess cordova.

        cordova platform add android --save exited with exit code 1.

        Re-running this command with the --verbose flag may provide more information.
npm ERR! code ELIFECYCLE
npm ERR! errno 1
npm ERR! copay@7.1.1 prepare:copay: `npm run clean && npm run apply:copay && ionic cordova platform add ios; ionic cordova platform add android && npm run fix:fcm`
npm ERR! Exit status 1
npm ERR!
npm ERR! Failed at the copay@7.1.1 prepare:copay script.
npm ERR! This is probably not a problem with npm. There is likely additional logging output above.

npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR!     /home/name/.npm/_logs/2019-11-09T21_53_17_974Z-debug.log

which as it turns out, others are struggling with, too without much help from the provider, who closed the issue without helping.

At this point we realize, the version on Google Play, 7.1.7 is nowhere to be found in their git repository:

$ git log --grep="7.1.7"
$ git tag | grep "7.1.7"
$

Therefore for now our verdict is that Copay cannot be easily verified.

We did give compilation another try using a Cordova Docker we found here. Generally we would love to see projects share Dockerfiles with which their build instructions just worked but for now, here is what we tried:

$ docker pull beevelop/cordova:latest
me@home:~/StudioProjects/copay$ docker run --name=cordova -v /home/me/StudioProjects/copay:/mnt -it beevelop/cordova bash
root@3eae2071ceaf:/tmp# cd /mnt/
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm install

> secp256k1@1.1.5 install /mnt/node_modules/secp256k1
> node-gyp rebuild

gyp ERR! configure error
gyp ERR! stack Error: Can't find Python executable "python", you can set the PYTHON env variable.
...
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# apt update ; apt install python -y
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm install

> secp256k1@1.1.5 install /mnt/node_modules/secp256k1
> node-gyp rebuild

gyp ERR! build error
gyp ERR! stack Error: not found: make
...
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# apt install make
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm install

> secp256k1@1.1.5 install /mnt/node_modules/secp256k1
> node-gyp rebuild

make: Entering directory '/mnt/node_modules/secp256k1/build'
  CXX(target) Release/obj.target/secp256k1/functions.o
make: g++: Command not found
...
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# apt install g++
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm install
...
npm WARN lifecycle copay@8.0.4~postinstall: cannot run in wd copay@8.0.4 npm run env:dev && npm run prompt (wd=/mnt)
npm WARN @angular-devkit/build-webpack@0.12.4 requires a peer of webpack@^4.6.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN @ngtools/webpack@7.2.4 requires a peer of webpack@^4.0.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN @zxing/ngx-scanner@1.2.1 requires a peer of rxjs@^6.2.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN awesome-typescript-loader@5.2.1 requires a peer of typescript@^2.7 || ^3 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN circular-dependency-plugin@5.0.2 requires a peer of webpack@>=4.0.1 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN mini-css-extract-plugin@0.8.0 requires a peer of webpack@^4.4.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN ngx-barcode@0.2.4 requires a peer of @angular/core@^4.0.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN terser-webpack-plugin@1.2.1 requires a peer of webpack@^4.0.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN webpack-dev-middleware@3.4.0 requires a peer of webpack@^4.0.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN webpack-dev-server@3.1.14 requires a peer of webpack@^4.0.0 but none is installed. You must install peer dependencies yourself.
npm WARN optional SKIPPING OPTIONAL DEPENDENCY: fsevents@1.2.9 (node_modules/fsevents):
npm WARN notsup SKIPPING OPTIONAL DEPENDENCY: Unsupported platform for fsevents@1.2.9: wanted {"os":"darwin","arch":"any"} (current: {"os":"linux","arch":"x64"})

added 3 packages from 10 contributors and audited 76060 packages in 18.811s
found 17 vulnerabilities (7 low, 1 moderate, 9 high)
  run `npm audit fix` to fix them, or `npm audit` for details
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm run clean-all
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm install
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm run apply:copay
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm run prepare:copay
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm run final:android
...
Checking the license for package Android SDK Platform 27 in /opt/android/licenses
Warning: License for package Android SDK Platform 27 not accepted.

FAILURE: Build failed with an exception.

* What went wrong:
A problem occurred configuring project ':CordovaLib'.
> You have not accepted the license agreements of the following SDK components:
  [Android SDK Platform 27].
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager "platforms;android-27"
root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# npm run final:android
...
45 actionable tasks: 2 executed, 43 up-to-date
Built the following apk(s):
	/mnt/platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/app-release-unsigned.apk

> copay@8.0.4 sign:android /mnt
> rm -f platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/android-release-signed-aligned.apk; jarsigner -verbose -sigalg SHA1withRSA -digestalg SHA1 -keystore ../copay.keystore -signedjar platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/android-release-signed.apk platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/app-release-unsigned.apk  copay_play && $ANDROID_HOME/build-tools/28.0.3/zipalign -v 4 platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/android-release-signed.apk platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/android-release-signed-aligned.apk

Enter Passphrase for keystore:
jarsigner: you must enter key password
npm ERR! code ELIFECYCLE
npm ERR! errno 1

Although it looks bad, here we actually have what we wanted: platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/app-release-unsigned.apk

We are not surprised to find this apk to massively differ from the one on Google Play as we were not building the (not published) correct version.

At this point we found there is a relevant commit:

$ git branch -r | grep "7.1"
  origin/v7.1
$ git checkout v7.1
Switched to branch 'v7.1'
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/v7.1'.
$ git log --grep="7.1.7"
commit 84acad445ad76e2572869d9c7bcd1eaf10764aa1 (HEAD -> v7.1, origin/v7.1)
Merge: be5809a48 685dbbb6d
Author: Matias Alejo Garcia <ematiu@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu Nov 14 16:45:11 2019 -0300

    Merge pull request #10333 from cmgustavo/bug/plugin-fcm-02

    Bump app v7.1.7 - Fix cordova-plugin-fcm

commit 685dbbb6d52f5f7db3b84c8e2fc5271b54d6e201
Author: Gustavo Maximiliano Cortez <cmgustavo83@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu Nov 14 11:33:20 2019 -0300

    Bump app v7.1.7 - Fix cordova-plugin-fcm

but compiling revision 84acad445ad76e did also result in massive differences with the version on Google Play:

BitPay diffs 1

BitPay diffs 2

this is by far not the only thing that differs

so our verdict remains: This app is not verifiable.

Above is not the whole picture of what we went through to get to this point. Here is just the command history from the Docker session:

root@3eae2071ceaf:/mnt# history
    1  cd /mnt/
    2  ll
    3  npm install
    4  apt update
    5  apt install python
    6  npm install
    7  apt install make
    8  npm install
    9  apt install g++
   10  npm install
   11  npm run clean-all
   12  npm install
   13  npm run apply:copay
   14  npm run prepare:copay
   15  git checkout v7.1.7
   16  git tag
   17  git log
   18  npm run prepare:copay
   19  npm run final:android
   20  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager --licenses
   21  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager update sdk --no-ui --filter android-27
   22  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager update sdk --filter android-27
   23  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager android-27
   24  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager --list
   25  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager update
   26  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager platforms;android-27
   27  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager "platforms;android-27"
   28  npm run final:android
   29  ll platforms/android/app/build/outputs/apk/release/app-release-unsigned.apk
   30  yes $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager "platforms;android-27"
   31  yes $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager "platforms;android-28"
   32  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager "platforms;android-28"
   33  $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager "platforms;android-29"
   34  npm run final:android
   35  git checkout 84acad445ad
   36  history
   37  npm install
   38  npm run clean-all
   39  npm run apply:copay
   40  npm install
   41  npm run apply:copay
   42  history
   43  npm run prepare:copay
   44  npm run start:android
   45  history
   46  npm run final:android

With all the investigations above, this would be my build instructions:

$ docker run -v /path/to/copay:/mnt -it beevelop/cordova bash /mnt/build.sh

with this build.sh:

cd /mnt/ && \
apt update && \
apt install python make g++ -y && \
npm run clean-all && \
npm install && \
npm run apply:copay && \
npm run prepare:copay && \
yes | $ANDROID_HOME/tools/bin/sdkmanager "platforms;android-27" && \
yes "" | npm run final:android

Other Observations

Copay has a Bug Bounty Program.

(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.