Hey Nathan,

Thanks for the detailed information!

Looking at Trezor’s case which involved extracting the private keys from a physically compromised device is significantly more difficult to execute compared to the Ledger hack that resulted in the exposure of customer information.

In the Trezor case, the attacker would require physical access to the device and expertise in extracting the private keys, making it a highly targeted attack. On the other hand, the Ledger hack exposed customer information, such as email addresses and phone numbers, which can lead to potential phishing attempts and scams. This type of attack can be more widespread and affect a larger number of customers.

So the scale and impact of the hacks are quite different although it’s important to acknowledge the vulnerabilities of Trezor as well, so thanks for pointing that out.

And regarding the new Ledger service, I’ve seen other Twitter threads saying how bad this will be for self-custody. I guess the truth lies somewhere in the middle. We’ll have to see when this service becomes available.

Anyway, thank you for taking the time to talk about this topic!