Hardware wallets today are considered to be one of the best cryptocurrency storages at the expense of convenience and reliability. More and more manufacturers are entering the market, but there are still two leaders - Ledger and Trezor. Basically it is from them that the best wallet users choose, and this choice is often difficult. To simplify it, consider the features of the wallets of both companies and try to figure out which device is preferable today!
Hardware wallets Ledger and Trezor: the history of creation
Hardware cryptocats These are electronic-type physical devices designed specifically for the storage of cryptocurrency.. They differ in the increased security of internal storages, and among themselves they differ in the protection technologies that are used in them and in the functionality.
According to these parameters, users often choose the best wallet. The main criterion, as a rule, is security, since the main function of wallets is to protect the user's money from intruders.
The functionality in hardware cryptocaps plus or minus is similar, so it does not play such a role.
Ledger and Trezor became market leaders precisely because of the reliability of their products. Or, at least, reliability in the eyes of users.
Ledger Company appeared in 2014 year by the efforts of the Frenchman Eric Larshevek. A few years before that, he had studied the possibilities of cryptocurrency in the French Bitcoin center, which he himself founded.
According to the results of the work, he came to the conclusion that the wallets present at the market are catastrophically unreliable, and therefore the cryptoindustry needs a high-quality, protected product. This line - the pursuit of maximum security wallet - became the basis of the ideology of the company Ledger and provides it with increasing popularity to this day.
Few other reasons for popularity Trezor. This company is a pioneer in its field, and the pioneer is not bad. It appeared in the Czech Republic's 2012, when one of the founders, Marek Palatinus, had more than 3 thousands of bitcoins stolen from the wallet (about $ 12 thousands at that time).
Palatinus, then head of the blockchain-based company Satoshi Labs, came to the same conclusion as Larshevek later: that the industry needs a reliable device for storing cryptocurrencies. Together with the Trezor co-founder, he developed the first hardware wallet in the history of cryptocurrencies.
The users appreciated the decision and the wallet was relatively actively bought, since the device at that time was a breakthrough and looked much safer than the alternatives.
Palatinus tried to optimize it, Trezor cooperated openly with customers, there were no special bugs, there were no failures and leaks, so the wallet quickly conquered the market.
After it, alternative copies began to appear, but none of them were superior to the original, so preference was given to the original and Trezor essentially broke away from its competitors. This was the case before the appearance of Ledger, but even now many prefer Trezor according to the old habit.
Ledger and Trezor hardware wallets: toKey Security Differences
The security of the hardware cryptographs is provided at several levels - hardware, user and physical. The better the protection is implemented on each of them, the higher the reliability of the wallet and the potential security of cryptocurrency.
This is not to say that one of the levels is much more important than the other objectively. But when considering crypto wallets, the hardware layer plays the greatest role, because providing really good protection here is the most difficult and most expensive - and it is often neglected.
Here is the key difference between the Ledger wallet and the Trezor. Strictly speaking, it will be about Ledger Nano S: it is the only one today that is officially sold. Previously, the company offered another model - Ledger Blue, but later, due to weak demand, high prices and lower reliability, it was withdrawn from the official store.
Any hardware wallet is controlled by a microcontroller (chip), which generates and, relatively speaking, stores private keys. The generation of private keys as such is far from being used not only in blockchain technology, but almost everywhere where encrypted data is transmitted. Accordingly, a lot of chips today.
Trezor uses one of the simplest - STM32F205. The STM32F2xx series appeared more than five years ago, today it is used in the simplest electronic devices, does not imply any particularly strong data encryption, and does not have a security certificate, that is, it does not meet international standards adopted today.
There are two controllers in Ledger Nano S:
- STM32F042K. The controller of the line, similar to the STM32F2xx and the security characteristics differ little.
- ST31H320. More reliable, having an international security certificate EAL5 + and which, according to this certificate, is a “safe vault” or “safe enclave”. Used, for example, in certain banking transactions. He is responsible for storing private keys in Ledger.
What of it? Suppose a user's computer is infected with a program that allows remote access to a connected wallet. Having received it, an experienced attacker will be able to access information on STM32 relatively easily, but it will not break ST31. Therefore, he will not receive keys from Ledger, he will receive keys from Trezor.
External user level protection is about the same on both wallets and suggests the following feature set:
- Set the pin code on the device.
- Using two-factor authentication for transactions.
- The ability to use multi-signatures (several keys that can be stored in different places).
This functionality is enough to protect the device to a minimum, so many manufacturers of wallets cost them only.
So, two-factor authentication will not help only if both the wallet and the user's computer are compromised, which is unlikely. Multi-signature will also fail only if the attacker has all the keys, which is also unlikely if they are stored in different places.
The pin-code assumes that the device is locked after three unsuccessful attempts to enter, that is, simply bruising it will not break it - you will have to reach the hardware level again. True, this is where the small risks begin for the same reason: the Trezor PIN is easier to access due to the lack of secure storage.
Trezor has the same vulnerability at the internal user level. Both purses, like any other devices, have their own private numbers - so that the user can make sure, upon receipt, that he is holding the same device that the manufacturer sent him.
But Trezor private number is registered in the same chip; Ledger has it in secure storage. Theoretically, an attacker could completely replace Trezor during the delivery process, rewriting including the internal number and installing malicious software on the wallet, but the user will not detect this. With Ledger it is unlikely to pass.
On the physical level Trezor also loses to a competitor: Ledger Nano S case has a protective metal plate. The Trezor case is made entirely of plastic, which is less reliable. In addition, the body of many Trezor devices poorly processed at the joints. The Ledger housing does not usually have a bad build feature.
Hardware wallets Ledger and Trezor: comparison of other parameters
Both purses are supported by all leading cryptocurrencies., a number of the most popular (Dash, ZCash and others), as well as all tokens operating on the ERC-20 algorithm.
In small details, however, the list of supported currencies may vary. For example, Trezor supports Namecoin, NEM, and Ledger supports Ripple and lesser known currencies not supported by Trezor. But both developers add new popular currencies quickly.
For the operation of the wallets on the computer, you must install an application that works as a normal "hot" wallet.
These applications can be different, and Ledger supports a slightly larger list - for example, MyEtherWallet, Electrum, Mycelium, Copay and several others, and also, of course, has its own purses-applications.
Trezor offers only the necessary minimum - its applications, MyEtherWallet and other wallets, designed specifically for individual cryptocurrencies.
Perhaps this increases reliability, because the Trezor user is minimally connected to third-party platforms and is not exposed to the risks that are observed on these platforms. On the other hand, he, unlike the user Ledger, has no choice.
Ledger wallets provide the opportunity to trade on the EtherDelta Exchange - right from the inside of the wallet, without withdrawal and subsequent deposit of funds to the exchange purse.
Trezor wallets do not provide such an opportunity, again for security reasons: according to the developers, EtherDelta is not a sufficiently reliable exchange.
On the one hand, EtherDelta reviews are not always positive; on the other hand, Trezor again deprives users of choice. True, potential Ledger users should consider that the commissions for trading from the wallet will be substantial.
Both purses also provide:
- Ability to view the full address of the recipient during the transaction (in Ledger, this function was added much later, which makes wallets with old firmware more vulnerable than wallets with new ones, since attackers have the opportunity to replace hidden addresses).
- The ability to restore the wallet by mnemo-phrase (which is important to keep away from the wallet and applications).
Combined with all levels of protection, the use of these features ensures high safety of funds.
The size of both wallets is quite convenient: Ledger - 90 x 18 x 9 mm; Trezor size 60 x 30 x 6 mm. The weight is also not too different: Ledger - 16g, Trezor - 12g.
Both have a small screen and two buttons that control the wallet in almost the same way. The Ledger has an OLED screen, the Trezor has an LCD. Theoretically, the first is of higher quality, it has a higher color brightness. Practically within the mini wallet screens, it doesn't matter.
Both wallets support the most popular operating systems. - Windows, Linux, Mac, but Ledger also supports Chrome OS.
Finally, the Ledger Nano S is priced at € 79 today. Trezor wallets start at 89 euros, and with additions like the metal case that Ledger has by default, it goes up to 159 euros.
Ledger today can be considered a more optimal tool for storing cryptocurrencies than Trezor. It significantly exceeds the competitor in the level of protection and today provides the maximum protection that can be found on the market of hardware wallets in principle.
This is not to say that Trezor is unreliable in principle. For an ordinary crypto user who observes the elementary cybersecurity technique and never talks about millions of dollars in bitcoins in his account, it is quite enough. But Trezor is definitely a wallet more unreliable compared to a competitor.
Ledger surpasses it in other parameters - from the appearance to a little more opportunities. Not the fact that the Ledger wide functionality is worth using. At least, if there is no serious need, the use of third-party resources when it comes to the crypto wallet should be minimized. But if a serious need suddenly appeared - Ledger wins.
And there is a price at which Ledger - with better performance - also wins.
Eventually it is more expedient, perhaps, to dwell on the French company. Exception: when a user plans to regularly use a cryptocurrency that Trezor supports, but does not support Ledger.