Hardware Wallet Compatibility For Web3 Applications
If a Web3 application does not have hardware wallet support, it simply should not exist.
Web3 project leaders often create applications for their NFT collections or tokens. This is important for the growth of a project as it forms the very basis of giving a project value.
If, however, a Web3 application does not have hardware wallet compatibility yet, then it simply should not exist for public usage at all until it does have hardware wallet compatibility — unless that application does not require an on-chain connection of a wallet for the verification or use of assets.
Releasing an application whereby community members are forced to transfer their valuable assets to a hot wallet in order to fully utilise is highly irresponsible and borderline immoral on the part of project leaders.
Indeed, if those assets are subsequently drained because they were in the hot wallet precisely because a project needed them to be in a hot wallet, the fault lies squarely with the project’s developers or leaders — even if the drain was from somewhere else entirely unrelated to the project.
You’ve heard me right. If a project “forces” the transfer of assets from a hardware wallet to a hot wallet, then even if the user of that wallet accidentally connected this hot wallet to another unrelated malicious application somewhere else in Web3 and had their wallet drained, the fault would lie squarely on the project that had encouraged them to hold their precious asset in a hot wallet in the first place. If the application was compatible with a hardware wallet, then that now-stolen NFT would still be in its original owner’s possession.
Of course, a project can rarely force an asset holder to actually do anything — but more often than not, if an asset holder can’t use an application, they would be disadvantaged in some way.
And disadvantaging the most careful and responsible members of a community is not the cleverest thing to do.
There might be some rebuttal to this along the lines of “Everyone should be responsible and safe while using Web3, only linking their wallets to trusted sites.”
This is true. People should be careful when it comes to the custody of their Web3 assets. Unfortunately, there is no way to guarantee that a hot wallet will truly be safe unless no transactions happen at all. Even if a hot wallet only ever connects to and transacts on bookmarked and trusted sites, who is to say that those sites will never be hijacked — with their original links linking to drainers instead?
Hot wallets are effectively a ticking time bomb, and there is always a lingering chance that they’ll be drained at some point. This is why for many, being responsible on Web3 means having all their assets on hardware wallets.
Moreover, legit projects on Web3 should set a good example and proclaim the right message about how digital assets should be kept safe. Creating applications without hardware wallet support is doing precisely the opposite.
Most projects already understand and agree with this article — that’s why most applications already have hardware wallet support. If, however, you’re one of those projects that are releasing applications that are incompatible with hardware wallets, think hard about what you’re doing.
Yes, you may be behind schedule. Yes, there may be a lot of FUD from the community because you’re behind schedule. Yes, hardware wallet support is a much more difficult and longwinded process to achieve than you might have originally thought.
Yes, it’s all a big effort. But that effort is worth it. The delays are worth it. If you truly believe in making a Web3 a better place, then you need to do the right thing — especially for the community that has invested in you and has put their trust in you.
Written by: Jpegtologist
