{ "episodeId": "SLP771", "speakers": { "stephan": { "name": "Stephan Livera", "role": "host", "tag": "STEPHAN" }, "dhruv_bansal": { "name": "Dhruv Bansal", "role": "guest", "tag": "DHRUV" } }, "segments": [ { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "00:00", "start": 0.0, "text": "Hi everyone, welcome back to Stephan Livera Podcast. Rejoining me on the show today is Dhruv Bansal from Unchained. He is a co-founder and CISO, many of you will already know Unchained as a provider of Bitcoin financial services, but done, you know, using Bitcoin native keys and, Bitcoin native approach where maybe you might hold two keys and they hold one, and, you know, they can help you provide a vault or do a loan, this kind of thing. So, certainly an interesting, time right now. Now, as I'm sure everyone's, you know, anyone who's watching this show is probably familiar with the myriad attacks that, you know, the Bitcoin ecosystem and industry has undergone recently. I mean, so let's see, the Coldcard thing Boltz dot exchange, BTC Pay, Core Lightning, and the Liquid thing just recently, like all just in the last what, month and a bit?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "00:55", "start": 55.0, "text": "Yeah, it's a lot. Scary." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "00:59", "start": 59.0, "text": "And so obviously, you guys over at Unchained have been obviously a big promoter of the idea of multisig. That's been a big core part of your business model," }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:11", "start": 71.0, "text": "so I guess let's just start there with the Coldcard thing because obviously that was, you know, as I recall, like 27th, 28th July, around there, basically end of July is when we kinda knew about this Coldcard thing." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "01:24", "start": 84.0, "text": "Two years ago at this point." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:26", "start": 86.0, "text": "Yeah." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "01:26", "start": 86.0, "text": "I think it was actually about a month, month and a half ago exactly." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:30", "start": 90.0, "text": "Yeah. So talk to us from an Unchained perspective, you know, what was the-- I guess let's start with, let's start with the high level, like, was there a lesson that we can take from this?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "01:42", "start": 102.0, "text": "There's, I think there are so many, there are so many, and I, I think m-many people have been thinking about the impacts on, on themselves, Bitcoin, technology, etcetera. I think there's a ton. I, I think I could just spit them off the top of my head, I wouldn't get into each one. I think number one is no single points of failure, and self-custody doesn't equal not having single points of failure automatically. You have to arrange for that to be true. I feel like that's a number one thing. And number two thing" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "02:10", "start": 130.0, "text": "new, new, new things are, are scary right now, right? The, the newer that something is, the less battle hardened and tested it has been for decades, et cetera, et cetera, the scarier it kind of becomes. we're seeing that a lot with-- a lot of the things that you mentioned are second layer, relatively new," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "02:30", "start": 150.0, "text": "Things that have been added to Bitcoin, it's not Bitcoin itself that's being hacked, right? It's these additions to it, these things that are adjacent to it. so that's why you have to get super careful. And then I would say third, it's just like all computers are gonna be headed in this direction soon, right? Like it's not just Bitcoin or Bitcoiners that are, are struggling at, right now, it's gonna be everybody, and that is terrifying." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "02:53", "start": 173.0, "text": "Yeah, there's a lot to pick apart inside of that. I think a lot of people--" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "02:59", "start": 179.0, "text": "So here's the thing, probably a lot of people who are serious about Bitcoin, they've heard of multisig, but they haven't actually gone and taken that step to use it, right? Now, it's probably-- I've just kind of thrown out these numbers, and I'm, you know, interest-- Any listeners or yourself, push back on me if I'm getting these numbers wrong. At a guess, ballpark, maybe ten to twelve million hardware wallets have been sold, like, you know, all time, once you add like Trezor, Ledger, and all the others, BitBox, Jade, Coldcard, whatever else. Out of that, there's probably like four or five unique hardware wallet users, and then out of that again, it's probably only like, I'd guess, fifty thousand or one hundred thousand something in that range who actually use multisig for their cold storage, you know? Like, so we can, we can chat about multisig until the cows come home, but if it's like one percent or two percent of the hardware wallet users Like, is there a, is there a difficulty around ease of use? Is it a knowledge thing? Is it just laziness? Is it just like, why, why has multisig kind of struggled?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "04:04", "start": 244.0, "text": "Yeah, I, I think it's a mix of all those, plus truthfully, it's maybe not necessary for everybody when their stack is really small, you know what I mean? Like," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "04:15", "start": 255.0, "text": "you know, one man small is another man's big, but like, I, I think, those numbers that you said kinda line up with my own intuition, what I suspect. but it's important in that, you know, group of five million, that cut to one million, that cut to whatever, to, to recognize, okay, what of those people, who has like more More than one Bitcoin, more than ten Bitcoins, right? Like those cuts also matter, it's kind of a multidimensional thing. And that's where I think it gets really interesting because my hope is that, yes, even though there may only be approximately fifty to one hundred thousand, let's say Americans, I'm not sure if you were even talking worldwide or Americans, maybe-- I was talking just worldwide, but I mean, just, I mean, you, you tell me. It's fact that there's two probably difference between America and the world or something like that, right? But yeah, so of Multi-sig, would we guess, have more than ten coins or twenty coins or some, starting to get to like crazy big numbers, right? Like, my hope is that the converse, that people who have large balances are more likely to be multi-sig, I hope that that is true." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "05:19", "start": 319.0, "text": "and certainly on Unchained, that's what we tend to see, you know, Unchained, the ba-the average balance of an Unchained client tends to be tens of Bitcoin, approximately. So these are, you know, by large, wealthy people with a" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "05:34", "start": 334.0, "text": "Scary about the Coldcard incident is realizing these statements are probably not entirely true, that you have people who are educated, smart, know a lot about Bitcoin, who have a ton of Bitcoin, had, they had a lot to lose, and they still weren't on multisig, and they were still on just, you know, single vendor cold card kind of situation, and that to me is, that's very scary, that's, that's surprising, and, and I think those people are getting kind of a rude wake up call of like, wow, okay, so it's not" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "06:04", "start": 364.0, "text": "it-- for, for those people, I really hope that that's a lesson that they've drawn here, whether it's painful or not, it's one that they stick to." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "06:09", "start": 369.0, "text": "The other big question that will come is Are a lot of people just gonna go to ETFs and go to custodial Bitcoin because of this, because they've lost trust in the idea of just self-custody or they've, they've had their, you know, it's like we, you know, we got rug pulled or people got the, the ground shaken beneath them and they don't feel like it's safe now to just stack into self-custody, as many of us were, were saying and doing for years, stack into self-custody. Now, are people gonna shift that thinking?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "06:40", "start": 400.0, "text": "I mean, I think to some degree inevitably the answer is yes, some people have already begun to do that. they're terrified and they're, they're looking for, for help, and they don't want the responsibility, right? so I get, I totally get it, it's a natural human reaction, but I don't know that it's the wisest reaction, and I feel like that's kind of what I've been trying to emphasize to people that I speak to, both personally, individually, clients of Unchained, and then in more of these public spaces. I was like, the lesson here isn't really self custody versus the exchange. That's, I think that's a kind of an ancient way to frame the problem, though it's very natural that we frame it that way. That's often how it's always been talked about. And I know I've said these words on your show many times, but like, there are alternatives in the middle. And truthfully, the real problem, like the real bad guy of this whole thing, is single points of failure. You know, we know from the history of Bitcoin, you, you and I have had many conversations" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "07:34", "start": 454.0, "text": "Yeah, there are the counterparties today in the industry are more trusted than ever. I think they're truthfully more secure than ever. There are larger firms with, that are more professional in their practices and so forth, but that doesn't mean that they're infallible. And in general, that's like my own read on how I like to approach engineering and risk management in this world is, you can believe that people are well-intentioned and you can believe they're talented, but you shouldn't never believe that they're perfect, and that goes for yourself as well, right? That goes For Unchained staff and the products and things we build, we're very good engineers, we're good security engineers, we're great risk managers, but I don't trust us to be perfect. And so therefore, I have to design a system in which we can make mistakes and the world isn't ended. And I think that's really the way that I would like all Bitcoiners to behave, is go ahead and if you trust Trezor and you trust Ledger, yeah, I do too, they're great brands, but I like to not have to trust them. I like to mix them up together" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "08:34", "start": 514.0, "text": "Sometimes to people to go check out Coinbase if they haven't," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "08:38", "start": 518.0, "text": "ever gotten into Bitcoin before, though increasingly these days, truthfully, I'm recommending the ETF above Coinbase. But When you start to care, when the holdings become meaningful, that is a single point of failure, and I think that's the real thing to worry about, because I saw a couple charts where people were comparing like amount of coins that were lost by self-custody versus like amount of coins that were lost by exchanges, and it's like, that's like, again, the wrong comparison. It's, it's how many coins were lost by-- I'm sorry, I didn't get the call here. It's how many coins were lost by, having single points of failure ultimately as compared to situations" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "09:14", "start": 554.0, "text": "Coins were lost there. The answer is the vast majority of coins were lost due to there being some kind of a single point of failure in the system, whether it was a third party exchange, whether it was a single hardware wallet, whether it was a single manufacturer, whether it was a single person. I think that's something I'm also trying to hammer on for people is You can have an awesome multisig setup, and it can be super, you know, multi-vendor, multi-sig, geographically separated, all these wonderful things. But if you're the only person that knows about it or knows how to wield this, you know, apparatus, and you die, like, what are the odds your loved ones are gonna be able to get through that machine? You know, like, you could be a single point of failure. So it's just, it's-- that's the thing to be focused on, and I, I think it's very reasonable" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "10:02", "start": 602.0, "text": "For a variety of reasons, I personally would never put everything in there. Bitcoin's too dear to me, it matters too much to me. I want to have better protection than that, and so I continue to use Unchained, but also don't trust Unchained despite having built it, right? So I make sure that I check my own wallet words out, I make sure I do my key checks, I make sure I have geographic separation, and I use Unchained's connections feature. So Unchained allows you to not just share keys with Unchained directly, but also with Quorum with some family members, and that is for me a combination of a security solution as well as an inheritance solution. If I die, my wife doesn't have to go figure out what's up with my wallet words and other things like that. She's just gonna call, my dad, and Unchained, and they're gonna work it out together, and vice versa, right? My mom isn't gonna have to figure this out if my dad were to pass. I'm not gonna have to go ferreting through his drawers figuring out where his PIN is or anything like this." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "11:02", "start": 662.0, "text": "So I really hope more people, first of all, discover Unchained, discover multisig, multi-vendor multisig, all the things you can do, by the way, on your own without Unchained. But I think where Unchained is especially helpful is serving as a single platform where it makes it easy for family members or loved ones to kind of come in and see everything together and then participate in that process. That, that's my recommendation is don't confuse yourself because of an initial gut reaction and say, \"Oh, self-custody is bad,\" realize that it's single points of" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "11:32", "start": 692.0, "text": "To avoid that, entirely, and that's what people should be doing. I see." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "11:37", "start": 697.0, "text": "so just spelling out very high level, kind of the high level options that exist today for people. Now, as I've said, if you just leave coins on your crypto exchange, you're kind of just paying with risk, right? You're, you're likely, or, you know, you are putting up, you're increasing the risk that you are a victim in the next Mount Gox, FTX, Celsius, BlockFi, QuadrigaCX, you name it. Yes, You know, and that's, and that's only some of it, at least, right? There's many more. But the, I guess loosely speaking, you've got go to a custodian and pay them, right? Like the Bitgoes, the Coinbase custodians, the Anchorage's of the world, the Fidelity Digital Assets, the Fireblocks, et cetera. Then you've got Sort of, you know, get like a guided multisig kind of solution, right? Like yourself, like others out there, Casa, Anchor," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "12:27", "start": 747.0, "text": "Watch, there's a whole bunch." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "12:28", "start": 748.0, "text": "Yeah. or like a Nunchok, this kind of thing. Yeah, yeah, Nunchok, absolutely. you can, I guess, you can either pay a consultant who doesn't hold any of the keys, but they still walk you through how to do like a Sparrow or a Nunchok, and that, that can be like a multisig setup." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "12:46", "start": 766.0, "text": "Yep. Or, or You know, and like really learn to do it everything yourself, not even trusting anybody, right? And so I guess that's kind of loosely speaking, that's maybe a, a spectrum, let's say." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "13:01", "start": 781.0, "text": "How, how should people think about this? there may be, okay, so let's say in the realm of, you know, doing multisig. So let's say not using a custodian and not doing fully DIY, but let's say comparing yourself Unchained as a, let's say, guided multisig, where you get, you know, help, you, you're handheld, but Unchained holds one key versus, let's say, the model, where people go to like a consultant, where that consultant, you know, you pay the consultant and they teach" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "13:30", "start": 810.0, "text": "yourself, where they hold zero of your keys. How do you contrast those?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "13:35", "start": 815.0, "text": "Yeah, I think, a lot of these solutions are great and, and manageable. It's just what do you think is important in terms of risk management? Like, how do you-- what, what are your risks, right? Like, so just comparing those two specific examples, what I might say is that if you're someone that really, really values anonymity and you don't want to, for example, share your KYCAML data with Unchained, which is a reasonable thing to want, we- We have to take it from you, we are a financial institution that is US regulated, we have no choice. But moreover, as an entity which tends to hold one key in your account, we want to know who you are, we want to be able to identify you, because if, if you come to us later and you need a signature from us, we can't deliver one politely, otherwise we're not doing our job. So knowing your identity is important, and in general at Unchained, we tend to distinguish between privacy and anonymity. Right? You can retain your privacy at Unchained, but I think when you're working with, you know, one of the increasingly large number of consultants that are out there that can help you learn how to do this, you're much closer to being able to preserve your anonymity, right? They're gonna know who you are, but they don't have to report that to anybody. and, I don't, in some cases, you might be able to lie and say, \"I have a different name,\" and \"I'm paying you in cash,\" or however crazy you want to get about it, you can still get that advice, you can still" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "14:51", "start": 891.0, "text": "Maybe that's really valuable to you and that's something that you should do. I don't-- I tend not to value anonymity as much. I bought my coins on Coinbase way back in twenty thirteen, so they already know who I am. Everyone already knows who I am. I'm, I'm a public Bitcoin person. I'm talking all the time about it. Anonymity's out the window for me. but I understand for other people how important that is. Conversely," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "15:11", "start": 911.0, "text": "you won't have access to financial services. You're kind of on your own in your own multisig That won't be available. And then of course, if you lose one of the keys, you have to recover on your own. So I see there's a trade-off there, and I know how I make that trade-off. I, I say, \"Well, I'm gonna go with Unchained, and that's fine.\" Again, I totally understand why people would feel differently. A lot of this is also your stack. How big is your stack and how much do you want to work on the problem of protecting Bitcoin? Right? Something that Unchained has definitely noticed is," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "15:46", "start": 946.0, "text": "It's work to do what we do. It's work to set up multisig on your own, even with Unchained, and it's probably more work to do it without. this isn't a thing that like people are necessarily eager and excited to do, right? It, it is" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "15:58", "start": 958.0, "text": "You might want other plans for your Labor Day weekend, you know, than sitting down and mucking around with hardware wallets. That's not fun for everyone, it's scary, in fact, for a lot of people. and so you tend to put it off. And Unchained has definitely experienced our largest waves of adoption have always occurred when something terrible has happened, right? The pandemic, a hack, an event like this, people suddenly realize, \"Ah, I've been putting this off for like six months, I really need to go do it.\" and so perversely" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "16:27", "start": 987.0, "text": "Happen because people realize that they need to catch up on that thing that they were doing. so I would kind of like look at, you know, look, look in your soul, right? Like, how much risk do you feel you're carrying? Which way do you wanna, you know, handle this? But I think most importantly, probably start doing it if you haven't done it recently and you feel like you've been putting off the move from a custodian to a self custody situation or from a single sig to multi sig, like don't half-ass it right now. This isn't" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "16:56", "start": 1016.0, "text": "a And it's important to get safer as, as quickly as you possibly can." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "17:01", "start": 1021.0, "text": "Yeah. Now, on this, I mean, it's a good point you make. It's like how, you know, after big events happen, it's, it's like a recency bias. So after some big event happens, oh, maybe I should, you know, buy insurance for that particular thing, right? As an example. Yeah. now, the other kind of interesting one a lot of people are talking about is some of these solutions that try to slice it somewhere in the middle," }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "17:27", "start": 1047.0, "text": "Wallet, now it is a multisig, but you could kind of argue about how multi-vendor it is. Now, yes, it's one key in the device, one key on your phone, one key in the Amazon Nitro enclave or Hel, kind of managed by Block as an example. How would you compare something like Bitkey with, like a, you know, like an Unchained multi-vendor multisig?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "17:48", "start": 1068.0, "text": "Yeah, so I would say it's a different kind of trade-off. Like earlier we were talking about more, I think, I felt Use model on some level because it's one less key and we're doing a bunch of work for you. Here it's, it almost the opposite, right? I would say Unchained is more difficult to use. There's more things to learn than to use, but it's, it's an easier product. It's, it's designed to be easier to use, and that of course, again, comes with trade-offs, right? You're not getting some of like the nice display features and the screen. I feel like they were talking about adding a screen, I'm not sure if they" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "18:20", "start": 1100.0, "text": "ever-" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "18:27", "start": 1107.0, "text": "This year has a screen, which" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "18:29", "start": 1109.0, "text": "I think is a huge improvement. I'm, I'm really glad they have done that. That's a, it's a major fix in, in my view, and it makes it, I think, more usable in a lot of ways as well. So, but to your point, you're kind of in a single vendor ecosystem, right? You're, you're, the ease of use and the integration has kind of created larger dependency at that point, right? It's, it's a little bit more challenging to- To say that you don't have a single point of failure in that situation, it-- you, you do not have a single point of failure on, on a lot of levels in regards to keys and other things, but at the sort of systemic level, you're still kind of relying on, I don't know, one engineering team, one risk management structure, like one architect who thought of the whole thing, and something we're learning, right, is Lots of systems that appear to be multi-have multiple points of failure or have redundancies at some layer actually have a single point of failure at a different layer. Like, I'm sure we can get into it with some of the Liquid stuff, right, that I've" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "19:20", "start": 1160.0, "text": "been- Even the Liquid, yeah, I was exactly, I was" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "19:22", "start": 1162.0, "text": "exactly thinking about that. Twenty key holders over there, and yet there's just one little, you know, widget in the middle that was broken with a cache collision or something, and that causes this chaos, right? So, oh, it's, It's a little scary, and, and I think the more obviously the systems that you're using have redundancy and multiple points of failure at every single layer, like the, the more safe you should feel, then typically the more work and complexity is involved in setting that up. So then it again becomes a risk thing, right? Like, how much do you care to do that extra work?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "19:54", "start": 1194.0, "text": "From an Unchained perspective, how, you know, as an example, there may-- as an example, there may be some users or some customers who might have thought, \"Oh, I just wanna keep it easy for my family, so we'll just do two of the same hardware wallet type.\" And obviously now that, you know, this has happened with Coldcard, I'm sure there's a lot more interest now in truly doing multi-vendor, so you might have like one Ledger and one Trezor or whatever, right? How much extra work is that, not just for the user, but" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "20:23", "start": 1223.0, "text": "And their kids to be able to recover, right?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "20:26", "start": 1226.0, "text": "No, I think about that a lot. I think it's, it's something that likely is going to change at Unchained. historically, we've been sort of, neutral, right, about, about the devices. We've sort of-- It's, it's up to you what you wanna get, right? Like, go ahead, whatever you like, that's the right thing. And I don't think we're going to be as neutral anymore. I think we're gonna be a lot more vocal about," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "20:50", "start": 1250.0, "text": "hey," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "20:52", "start": 1252.0, "text": "it But again, because we, we're, I think we're all about trying to put that control in the hands of the clients. but yes, I do think we need to be more vocal about this, and it does cause exactly the issue that you described, is wait, so when I gotta learn how to use two of these things, I gotta have two different pieces of software installed on my computer just to use these things, that can be a challenge. I think one of the things I really like about, again, Unchained's connections feature is that it reduces the number of" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "21:23", "start": 1283.0, "text": "Two hardware wallets, two seed phrases, all that stuff, Unchained has the third. If you're using Unchained's connection feature, you only have one key and therefore one hardware wallet and one seed phrase. Your, your, your dad or your brother or your colleague, the person you trust, has got the other one. And those can be different brands, and so each of you can still commit to learning just one of these tools, but also still have multi-vendor protections, and so that's powerful." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "21:48", "start": 1308.0, "text": "I feel that I myself, narrowly avoided these bad- Outcomes, right? I've been a Trezor user for most of my life, it's just where I start, and like a lot of people, right? Like it's just the first one I started with, and I liked it, and so I kept using it, and I kept recommending it to people, right, throughout my life. most of my family are Trezor users probably at this point. now that makes me feel kinda smart because then they weren't hit by Coldcard, but I'm also like, oof, what if it had" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "22:17", "start": 1337.0, "text": "been Trez Hey, multi-vendor is probably important, and you should just pick two, and this kind of thing. Truthfully, I understand how hard that is. It's, it's such an exercise just to get someone to do it, to do anything with a hardware wallet, sometimes, when they're coming from kind of the normie world, right? That to say, \"Oh, and then you gotta do it twice.\" It's- That's hard. so I think, you know, Unchained is, w- I think we named collaborative custody on this show together, Stephan, some number of years ago, you and I, and I kind of feel like there's a new version of that, which is progressive custody, right? That like, you just- Let's not be too, too tribal and too purist about this, right? Let's just say wherever you are, there's one step that you could do to improve, take that step, right? And then later on, you can take another step, and you can move from the ETF to self-custody, to multisig, to all the things, and you can really, over time get to a place where you feel like you don't have single points of failure, and you just feel safer. And, and it is a journey, and I think ultimately that's" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "23:24", "start": 1404.0, "text": "Like we're a great brand, we have great technology and a great platform, but our product has been historically hard to use, and that means that a lot of people don't get to us until they're many years into their journey. and I'd like to help them earlier than that, so that's something we're working on as well." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "23:38", "start": 1418.0, "text": "Yeah, that's been a perennial challenge, right? Like for years and years and years, many of us have been, you know, saying, like, okay, it's okay, maybe you start with a phone wallet, right? I think most people are okay with that, like for small amounts, whatever, start with a phone wallet, you know, the amount that you would be comfortable walking down the street in cash, have that, you can have that in a phone wallet, and everyone's kind of okay with that idea. Then it's sort of people might say, okay, now a hardware wallet, Upgrade beyond that, or maybe hardware wallet plus a passphrase, you know, if they do that. And then there's a bunch of people who maybe are stuck in that stage of hardware wallet without going up to multisig. And maybe that's where the challenge is, because these are the people who are still stuck in a single point of failure." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "24:24", "start": 1464.0, "text": "And truthfully, like, there's a reason that that was the stance of all the experts, is that, hey, single sig is just fine for, for most people, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And it's because the, especially the nature It's like a cold card, right? Like, what could possibly go wrong with that, right? Like, that seems like it's so safe. and the idea that the thing that went wrong is this entropy issue, that's- Terrifying, that's absolutely terrifying. And I just want to make it really clear, by the way, on, on the theme of our prior conversation of, this isn't necessarily a reason to go running for, you know, ETFs and custodians and third parties. these kinds of issues, like bad RNG, this is something had, that has happened before in the world of computer science, and it will happen again. These are, it's, it's hard to test for perfect randomness, it really is. I'm not saying that the Coldcard team didn't do anything wrong or that" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "25:19", "start": 1519.0, "text": "manifested in giant organizations as well. It's not just, you know, a small Bitcoin startup that didn't know what they were doing or something like that. Like that's an unfair characterization of the nature of this problem. bugs like this have affected OpenSSL, which is something that, like, you're using right now, you and I, to record this video, somewhere behind the screens, we're using that piece of open source software to encrypt our communication over the internet. that had a zero day several years ago that was related to bad RNG that caused sessions to be able to Organizations that were entrusted to protect client data, they just had shitty RNGs, and it turns out people were able to break them. So," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "25:58", "start": 1558.0, "text": "going to trusted custodians, it's not a fix to the problem, again, like we were saying, right? Like they could also suffer the exact same problem, especially if they're using their own custom things or whatever else." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "26:09", "start": 1569.0, "text": "So yeah, I think the nature of the bug being that, and I also, I gotta share just like my personal story on this, like, like most people, I didn't believe this was happening. You know what I mean? I think it was like a Thursday night that I think Kevin from Lianna Wallet was really like publicly start-starting to talk about this and being like, \"Hey, I think this is happening,\" and I think you had even folks from Coldcard chiming in and being like, \"Nah, it's a user error, like, no way this isn't real.\" I went to bed that night believing the Coldcard side of that story, unfortunately, that like, oh, this is, it's a weird thing that someone is reporting, but like, there's zero chance this is a real issue, right? Because if it were, it would be so catastrophic, and I would like to go to bed tonight, right? So I kind of, I wasn't very cynical that evening, and I just let myself go to sleep, and then sure enough, Friday morning, it's full scale, all hands on deck at Unchained. it's been happening" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "27:02", "start": 1622.0, "text": "Plans and remediation plans, and I was able to join some of that effort on Friday when I, when I woke up. But it's so tempting to imagine how this could never have happened, right? Because it, it implies like so much bad, just bad stuff, right? It implies that you could do nothing wrong, you could have used your cold card exactly the way you were instructed to, you could keep the seed words safe, you could keep the cold card device in a safe location, and your coins could be gone anyway. And that's, it's extremely, extremely frustrating." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "27:32", "start": 1652.0, "text": "and I Imagine what it's like to be a person who had that experience and lost a significant amount of life savings despite having done everything, quote unquote, correctly. Like, I, I hope I never come across in conversations like this saying, \"Oh, you should've used multisig, right?\" Like, you probably should've, but like, man, my heart goes out to those people, man, that sucks, terrible." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "27:51", "start": 1671.0, "text": "Yeah, it's a real shame, and I think the, the other point that's interesting nowadays, obviously with AI, deepfakes, and all this other stuff, and phishing, and all other kinds of malware and scams. Even if you do trust a custodian, there's still a risk that the custodian gets tricked into believing it's you who wants to send those coins away, so it doesn't really take away that problem that you still, you know, you know, there's, there are famous kind of examples in the industry where people have had their accounts either hijacked or like some kind of, you know, takeover or some kind of phishing or some kind of," }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "28:26", "start": 1706.0, "text": "You know, a scam where they, you know, the service provider custodian thought it was really that person, and actually no, it wasn't." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "28:35", "start": 1715.0, "text": "Yeah, I mean, that's in general a difficult problem on the internet and increasingly an impossible one, right? Now with the existence of AI, like the solution is going to have to be something cryptographic, un-unsurprisingly, right? Like there has to be something that the AI can't fake its way into producing," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "28:51", "start": 1731.0, "text": "and we often like to call those things harbor wallets, right? So I, I kind of view, Bitcoiners have always been living in the future to some degree, and I think in this way specifically, right, the fact that we are using, we, we've armed dentists and everyday people with, you know, weapons-grade cryptography that is, you know, in a, in a pocket ergonomic format, like this is a device from the future, right? When we all understand that the internet is a dangerous place and you can't just roll up with no credentials and you can't just trust anything and you kind of need strong cryptography just to do basic interactions on the internet. I mean, that- It has been true for twenty years with HTTPS, which is a form of cryptography to keep our, you know, our communications safe. That's the little lock in your browser, right? There's a reason that's there." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "29:36", "start": 1776.0, "text": "but we also remember there was a time when HTTPS was only ever used on payment pages, right? So like the entire internet was essentially plaintext, and then only when you did a credit card transaction did you suddenly see the shield pop up or HTTPS in your browser URL. And then through the efforts of, of, you know, smart nerds, basically, there was an HTTPS- BTS Everywhere movement, we've just kind of moved to like, look, everything is gonna be on a HTBTS from now on, no matter what. And in general, this is good because it means that content and all the things that aren't necessarily payment oriented also get the protections of cryptography. And I very much see a similar pattern happening here now, right? So we're using hardware wallets to protect money again, right? It's, it's, it's where, it's where the internet touched money, we brought in that next level of cryptography. But increasingly, I think everybody's gonna be" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "30:26", "start": 1826.0, "text": "in some sense, a YubiKey or a hardware wallet or something like that is very similar to that, but it doesn't have a screen, right? So how can you really know what you're doing? So this notion of you need a cryptographic device with its own dedicated screen, which means that the attacker can't control the message on that screen, so you as the user can review what it says and make a decision about it. This is something Bitcoiners have been using for years, and it's something that normies are gonna have to embrace because it's the only way the internet is gonna keep" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "30:54", "start": 1854.0, "text": "Yeah, it's funny to kind of think about the evolution of security online, because it was sort of username and password, but then everyone was like reusing the passwords and using insecure passwords, and, you know, then it sort of became like, okay, no, you-- username, password, and 2FA. And then, but then the 2FA thing can get hacked, or then it's like, okay, your email, but then your email can get hacked, and then it's sort of like, okay, yeah, like maybe we need YubiKey or something like that, this U" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "31:24", "start": 1884.0, "text": "authentication styles, where it is a cryptographic challenge and you're-- when you touch that thing on the YubiKey and whatever, it's, it's answering that challenge, right?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "31:33", "start": 1893.0, "text": "Yeah. Yeah, and ultimately it's, it's-- there's a reason that as, as each new wave of next-gen AIC capability comes out, that it's Bitcoin adjacent things that are attacked, 'cause of course Bitcoin is the best thing that you could steal as an attacker, like pretty much, right? You're, you're gonna be hard-pressed to break into Bank of America's website and Or whatever, right? That's a, that's a hard thing to get away with, and it's harder to scale operationally across a large number of people. And so I think it's, again, no surprise that what we, what we see is we see," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "32:06", "start": 1926.0, "text": "attackers leverage these capabilities to go attack things which are adjacent to Bitcoin, right? So they're attacking hardware wallets, they're attacking services that deal with Bitcoin, especially those that deal with Bitcoin in, a direct way that manage this, so layer two software, Lightning Liquid, all these things, right? This is where Bitcoin lives. That is not on chain, and that's important too, right? I'm sure they've gone and these, these attackers have looked at actual Bitcoin D and said, \"Like, what can I do to this thing?\" And I'm sure they haven't found anything, right? There's that old line of the economists, like, two economists are walking down the street, right? Like, \"Hey, is that a hundred dollar bill on the ground?\" And the other one says, \"No, it can't be, 'cause if it were, someone would have taken it,\" right? And it's, it's like that kind of idea, right? Like right now My willingness to believe that layer two and three and beyond Bitcoin things are safe is like real low. I, in general, I'm a fan of Lightning and I want Lightning to succeed, but I'm not gonna put a ton of money into Lightning until it's extremely hardened. And the number of people that use Bitcoin is small, the number of people that use Lightning is even smaller, and so the care and attention it's received historically, in terms of security, has been low, which is not to say that it's a bad project, it's just the only thing that makes things really safe Attention and eyeballs. And it's, it's again, no surprise that like things like Liquid and Lightning and BTC Pay Server and all these things are getting hit, because they're processing Bitcoin and less people are using them than are using Bitcoin itself, and they're a little" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "33:36", "start": 2016.0, "text": "bit higher up in the stack, so they're a little bit more vulnerable and they're getting picked off. I think what's, I think what's gonna get really scary is when the-" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "33:45", "start": 2025.0, "text": "After they kind of go through, I would, I would imagine in the next few months, after they kind of go through most of the stuff that is absolutely Bitcoin adjacent, what are they gonna do next? They're gonna have to go to ransomware and then charging you Bitcoin to get your stuff back or," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "34:01", "start": 2041.0, "text": "blackmail or other kinds of things, like imagining that there was a famous incident where some website for cheating on your wife or something got like hacked and a lot of people's names were published, and I'm kind of imagining like what will happen on the internet if the huge amounts of data that have been collected over time that are still, still extensively private start to leak, right? People's financial decisions, like people's social and dating histories, like just communication and messages, like I also think that people who have been using always on, you know, and encrypted services have also, in some sense, been kind of living in the future, right? With the awareness that you can't simply trust the platform in the middle to keep everything safe. it's extremely dangerous time right now there, out there on the internet right now." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "34:47", "start": 2087.0, "text": "So where do you think things go, at least from a Bitcoin security perspective? Like, obviously there's been the whole red team effort, like Rob Hamilton and Kalle and a bunch of other guys, as well as other people just broadly in Bitcoin who have been doing this kind of maybe fuzz testing and now, trying to, trying to take AI, and use it defensively," }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "35:06", "start": 2106.0, "text": "Do you see that as-is that the main thing? Like, what does that look like going forward? Does it mean, as an example, does it mean, you know, we get less new features and really becomes like everyone's trying to batten down the hatches now and just focus on security instead of like building out new features?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "35:22", "start": 2122.0, "text": "I think it's a mix. I mean, definitely that is happening. Everyone is doing that, right? Unchained is doing that, I know for sure. we're using the same tools that the attackers have access to, and we're deploying them internally, and we're looking at our own code bases, and we're asking the questions. On some level, I think, I think actually it's Rob who said this on a recent call that I was on with him, that like the one advantage defenders have is we know our code bases better than the attackers do, right? They, we," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "35:51", "start": 2151.0, "text": "They're just, they're just hoping that they find something and then, oh, here's, here's the thing that the, let me try that, oh, it worked, great, I'm, I'm in. we as defenders know the codebase, we, we know which parts we're nervous about, right? We know that like, I've always worried that there's something wrong over here and I, I can't never found it myself, let me put the ID on, right? These are great things for companies to be doing right now, that are handling Bitcoin" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "36:19", "start": 2179.0, "text": "So that is happening. also though, I think features are interesting. I think there's so many features getting built right now, and so many of them are be- are being slapped together, by bad developers," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "36:32", "start": 2192.0, "text": "Who are enjoying the ability to quickly produce features and not really thinking critically about the surface area that those features are introducing. I think eventually AI will be good enough to not create security bugs if you didn't ask it to, and this kind of thing, but right now, I, I just don't accept that, right? There's, there's re- there's a reason that at Unchained, we are now in a place where non-technical people are producing code, but we are extremely suspicious of that code, and all code gets human reviewed, in ad-in addition to In addition to like our normal CI/CD practices, right? So there has to be a balance of like getting more value and more velocity from these tools with just like don't burn the ship down, you know what I mean? Like there's, we've worked too hard at Unchained for too long to, to wanna get taken out by some stupid bug that an AI introduced for us, right? So we tend to be extremely conservative about our development even with these tools in place, and I think most other good Bitcoin companies feel the same way, right? Like we don't- Understand there's a certain weightiness and responsibility to what we do, and we don't wanna mess it up. So we're unlikely to slop together features and publish them the way that you might if your stakes were just lower, right? If you're, if you're in a different industry where it doesn't matter, like, yeah, go ahead, maybe. Like, they'll eventually come for you like a year from now, but you have some time, right? So, you know, yeah, I wonder about" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "37:51", "start": 2271.0, "text": "that. So, so I guess looking forward, I mean- People, the last year or so, you know, we've been going through this bear market, and probably it seems like most people think we're out of the bear market now. anything else you're kind of looking forward to in Bitcoin just generally? What can people look forward to?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "38:13", "start": 2293.0, "text": "I don't know." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "38:15", "start": 2295.0, "text": "For a while there, there was this conversation brewing right around spam and, and BIP 110 and all these things and stuff I never really waded into in a public way. And it feels like that has also kind of resolved itself now, right? They're like, we've, they've kind of forked off, like it didn't work. Which wasn't necessarily surprising to me, but like, hopefully that conversation is less like immediate and in our faces now, and we can start to go back to other issues which I, I feel are more important. I, I think, I think, I think I've said this on your co- your, your show as well. It's like, I don't like spam, but at the end of the day, I just, I just don't care. I just don't care enough to, to want to do anything about it. I think it's totally fine. and we should" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "39:03", "start": 2343.0, "text": "Technology here, like if you build features, you're likely to introduce security problems, which you then have to spend time to fix. If you build features in Bitcoin, you may create opportunities for spam because computers are infinitely, flexible, and you're gonna have to then figure out how to, like, then eliminate that over time or, or make it more expensive typically, which is the solution. So For a long time, I've been wanting," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "39:24", "start": 2364.0, "text": "more Layer 2, right? Like more powerful features for spending, for, you know, communication. I think it's been so amazingly ironic slash cool, like to watch with this whole Liquid incident, the attackers and Blockstream like just negotiating on the chain, like it's some sort of like Usenet message board. I'm sure this isn't infuriating the people who feel like Bitcoin already has too much spam." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "39:50", "start": 2390.0, "text": "I, I don't think, honestly, the people who are saying Bitcoin should be more capable are saying you should be putting messages into Opera terms and chatting with people at Layer One. I don't think that's quite what is being proposed. But nonetheless, it's, it's been really interesting to see," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "40:05", "start": 2405.0, "text": "What it feels like, right? Like to, to, to do something a little bit more futuristic like that. and I, I want that stuff to not be in the chain, I want it to be in other places, but I think there's a tremendous value, especially as AI kind of starts to get more powerful and more ubiquitous, for Bitcoin to be able to serve as a basis for other kinds of things other than, quote unquote, merely sending payments on Layer One, right? Like the notion that you can use Bitcoin to move information through the internet, can use To, you know, incentivize people to store data and serve it back to you, again, not because it's happening on the blockchain, but because people are paying for it in Bitcoin. That's a very exciting future world for me, and I think it's one that- Number one, Bitcoin needs it because we need mining revenues to continue to be high if we want the, the miners to keep engaging with Bitcoin and not just run away to other energy-intensive industries like AI or other things. And number two, as AI becomes more powerful, like Humanity kinda needs to defend itself, and I think the best way to defend yourself against these kinds of tools is to have decentralized systems that you can rely upon. To me, decentralization means market driven, right? So it means we need ways to incentivize individuals to do things with computers for money. that's what Bitcoin ultimately relies upon. So I'm hoping that through that combination of we're kind of past the spam conversation and we're now confronting the AI threat, that together these two things like reincentivize" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "41:36", "start": 2496.0, "text": "the community to start thinking about these problems and solving them a little bit more head on. I would be super excited about that." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "41:43", "start": 2503.0, "text": "And as you said, like some of these uses have been around for a long time, things like open timestamps is probably the big obvious example, but even in the world of multisig, there's some to-- there's some chatter about this idea of like doing an encrypted multisig descriptor backup on chain, this kind of thing, like that could be something that maybe, you know, one of the concerns people have about multisig is, \"Oh, what if I lose my descriptor?\" But okay, what if you had like an encrypted descriptor that's posted in the chain? And you're paying, people are paying fees for that, and it relates to people being able to be confident that they can do multisig and then therefore remove single points of failure. Yeah. So I guess there's, you know, there, there may be arguments around that, and maybe that would be something useful for people. Now of course, you, at, for yourselves at Unchained or other providers, you keep a backup of the descriptor for your customers, but, you know, it could be an example of, you know, people who wanna do the DIY thing or maybe it's" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "42:37", "start": 2557.0, "text": "just" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "42:39", "start": 2559.0, "text": "Out there. I guess one other topic I wanted to touch on, and you've been touching on this a little bit, but, you did a talk, I think, about a year ago or in 2025 about a network of keys. Do you mind just kind of giving a quick, like, what was the key? Takeaway from that, because I think it ties into what we're talking about here, doesn't it?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "42:59", "start": 2579.0, "text": "Yeah, I mean, it's ultimately like the, the same idea, right? It's that at the end of the day, single points of failure are really bad and they shouldn't exist, and in other mature industries, they don't exist typically, right? Like, there isn't no city that has a single road in and out, I mean, more or less, right? Like, no major city, and that's because the transportation network is multi-scale, fractal, extremely well-connected." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "43:24", "start": 2604.0, "text": "You know, in the world of insurance, right? Like every insurance company also has a company which insures it, right? Reinsurance as a category. and there are networks of reinsurers that all insure each other. And like, yeah, on some level, when that system is badly managed, it can fail. But in general, when it's working well and it's robust at a global scale, there is enough risk management to go around that we're able to, like, continue to operate the world despite ter-terrible, you know, natural disasters and things of this nature. And that They're saying, \"Hey, let's the custodian solve it, \"or \"I'll just do it myself.\" And again, neither of those options is good. What we really want is we want scenarios where there are hierarchical fractal sort of shapes to custody that, okay, if this guy over here in this local place fails, it's alright, right? Like kind of eventually rolls up somehow, and I don't know always the mechanism of what that will be in practice in the future, but whether it is through multisig or Taproot scripts or other constructs like this, or even business relationships on some And other things, like a failure here doesn't immediately translate into loss, right? Maybe it translates into delay and certain funds moving to various other places and someone from the neighboring city or the state level or the country level or like, like some higher level, right? Like much, much that as happens in the insurance industry, like something like that has to be built. And there are ways to do that, because Bitcoin is, you know, made inside of computers, it's very programmable and flexible, there are ways to do that without simply handing over control to the largest reinsurer, so to speak, right?" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "44:54", "start": 2694.0, "text": "That's not, that's not what I'm advocating for, nor do I think that's what it will ultimately become. And I think living in that future world, the notion that, like, oh, did you know that in the past sometimes people would lose their Bitcoin keys and then their Bitcoin would be gone, and people are like, \"Oh, that's so crazy, how could they have ever lived that way, right?\" Like, that's what I want. I want it to be so outlandish that Bitcoin is lost or destroyed because someone lost something in the world, right? That, that That is the problem today with self-custody, is that we are creating that scenario for people, and they're solving it the best way that they can, but that's also kind of a reflection of the fact that we're in this incredibly early stage of Bitcoin adoption. you know, I think in the future you can buy hardware wallets at gas stations because they're just everywhere, you know? they're not a special product in, in a meaningful way, they're like a lighter or, or a keychain or something like" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "45:44", "start": 2744.0, "text": "that. Yeah. And in fairness, I Yeah. even here in the UAE, there are some technology stores that sell Ledger just on the shelves. So it already exists to some extent. Everywhere." }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "45:55", "start": 2755.0, "text": "Yeah, I want that everywhere. And going back to what we were saying before, like if, if, if you only conceptualize those devices as useful to Bitcoin owners, that will never be true. But if you view them as just part of what it means to operate in a, you know, scarier, more AI, infused internet that every, everyone just has a cryptographic device at all times for all sorts of stuff," }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "46:17", "start": 2777.0, "text": "it's, Or something at some point, you can swap it in and out. Like, it starts to become more reasonable how you could build a network of keys. Well, I mean, we've already built a network of people, it already exists, right? Like, we're all, we're already wired into a multi-billion-person network on the internet. It isn't crazy to me that rather than people and emails and identities in a soft way, that could be turned into something a little bit more cryptographically hard and pointed, that like, there's actually a real network of keys in which risk can be shared and" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "46:45", "start": 2805.0, "text": "we" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "46:48", "start": 2808.0, "text": "Let's fix that. Let's, let's put energy and resources towards that, and that could be, you know, part of what governments are actually doing and part of what insurance companies and others are actually doing is trying to manage the risk at these huge levels because we understand it affects everybody. It's not just a weird thing that Bitcoiners are doing. It's like, it's, it's the, Bitcoin is the world's money at this point, and therefore we take it seriously, we manage these risks." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "47:09", "start": 2829.0, "text": "Yeah, fascinating. And as, as I'm just reminded also that how far ahead some Bitcoiners were, like Trezor, the first Bitcoin hardware wallet, and your first Bitcoin hardware wallet, and mine as well, back in the twenty thirteen, fourteen days, they were early on some of this stuff. They had U two F and Phi two like support on the device, like probably more than ten years ago. It's just that most people didn't think to use it that way. So it's kind of like they were already on this" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "47:34", "start": 2854.0, "text": "train. Yeah, they were mixing entropy from the host system and the Because they, they, I think they understand that air-gapped devices struggle to produce entropy, right? That's just a general fact. There's not enough shit happening on the air-gapped device to create enough randomness for it to have good entropy, and you have to combat that in some way, either through a hardware element or some kind of mixing. And again, that's a, that's a great perspective on single points of failure, right? Trezor's perspective was, we shouldn't ever source entropy from just one thing, we should always source from multiple things and combine it together because adding bad entropy" }, { "speaker": "dhruv_bansal", "time": "48:09", "start": 2889.0, "text": "At worst, it's additive, yeah. Yes, correct, yeah." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "48:12", "start": 2892.0, "text": "Yeah. So anyway, I guess that's, well, in some ways, Bitcoiners were ahead of that curve, and, I think that's maybe that's where the future is heading, whether that's more people like actually using UBI keys or using Bitcoin hardware wallets or similar. Like, I think the Foundation guys are doing something on this as well, similar." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "48:30", "start": 2910.0, "text": "yeah, maybe that's, that's where it's going, more cryptographic use of keys, and like you said, this I think really that is kind of the number one, the moral of the story here for us in Bitcoin, at least removing single points of failure where possible. You know, obviously easier said than done, but I think it's a, an important message for everyone. so everyone, make sure you check it out, go to Unchained dot com and you can find Dhruv and, what the guys are doing over there, obviously doing what they can to help more people secure their coins, and get Bitcoin financial services. so Dh" } ] }