pull down to refresh

20 sats \ 18 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 15 Apr \ on: Club Orange Wallet is now Self Custodial. 🔑 bitcoin lightning

trustodial?

write
compose
3 sats \ 13 replies \ @ClubOrange OP 15 Apr

Fully self-custodial.

reply
122 sats \ 12 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 15 Apr

I’m no pro at this stuff, but that’s not what people are saying about Spark.

reply
3 sats \ 11 replies \ @ClubOrange OP 15 Apr

Fair question. Spark is a statechain-based L2, so the trust model is different from base-layer Lightning: but in our implementation (Breez SDK) users hold their own seed, can export it, can withdraw on-chain to any BTC address, and can sweep to any other Spark-enabled wallet.

https://sdk-doc-spark.breez.technology/

reply
30 sats \ 10 replies \ @anon 15 Apr
but in our implementation (Breez SDK) users hold their own seed

does not equate to self-custody

can export it

does not equate to self-custody

can withdraw on-chain to any BTC address

with permission from spark operators

can sweep to any other Spark-enabled wallet.

does not equate to self-custody

reply
3 sats \ 9 replies \ @ClubOrange OP 18 Apr

You're right that Spark isn't on-chain self-custody in the purest sense — operators co-sign exits. What we moved away from is custodial, where Club Orange (or a third party) held the keys and could freeze, seize, or lose user funds.

With Spark: user holds the seed, user can exit unilaterally to on-chain BTC, user can sweep to another Spark wallet. Operators can censor but cannot steal. That's a meaningful trust reduction vs. what we had before.

reply
30 sats \ 5 replies \ @anon 18 Apr
user can exit unilaterally to on-chain BTC

prove it. post a video walkthrough of a unilateral exit from club orange.

these guys don't understand the difference

fwiw chatgpt doesn't understand the difference either

reply
3 sats \ 4 replies \ @ClubOrange OP 18 Apr

reply
30 sats \ 3 replies \ @anon 18 Apr

that's a withdrawal not a unilateral exit. spark's so called unilateral exit is about not needing spark involved in the exit. this is not that. this is a withdrawal that trusts spark operators to cooperate with you on the withdrawal. this withdrawal path is vulnerable to censorship and shotgun kyc.

i hope i haven't wasted your time. i know everyone is using spark now. most of us just want folks to understand that you and other people claiming "self-custody" have changed the definition dramatically to the point of making it near meaningless.

without unilateral withdrawal, spark wallet users control their funds about as well as they do when using a custodian - just with extra steps. that's okay for many people. it's just not "self-custodial."

view all 3 replies
30 sats \ 2 replies \ @anon 18 Apr

also

where Club Orange (or a third party) held the keys and could freeze, seize, or lose user funds.

you still hold the customer's spark keys on your servers in a way that Club Orange can spend or lose those funds, yes or no?

reply
3 sats \ 1 reply \ @ClubOrange OP 18 Apr

No, keys are stored in the user device.

reply
30 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 18 Apr

that's nice! i'm glad you aren't doing what primal is doing there.

reply on another page
47 sats \ 3 replies \ @anon 15 Apr

these guys don't understand the difference

reply
3 sats \ 2 replies \ @ClubOrange OP 15 Apr

Tell us more?

reply
30 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 15 Apr
  1. how do i unilaterally withdrawal without your or spark's permission? holding a key does not make something self-custodial. it means you are holding a key. self-custodial means self does not rely on trusted third parties.
  2. do you store customers keys on your servers in a way that Club Orange can unilaterally access?
reply
3 sats \ 0 replies \ @ClubOrange OP 18 Apr

deleted by author