Please login or register.

Dedicated Monero Hardware Wallet

Version: 1.0
Date: 15 September 2017
Name: RFC-HWALLET-1
Author: Michael Schloh von Bennewitz
Contact: [email protected]
IRC-contacts: msvb-lab, msvb-mob
Title: Dedicated Monero Hardware Wallet
Related to: RFC-HWALLET-2, RFC-HWALLET-3, RFC-HWALLET-4
Location: https://forum.getmonero.org/8/funding-required/88149/dedicated-monero-hardware-wallet/
Crosslink: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/6urao7/ffs_for_dedicated_monero_hardware_wallet/  
Crosslink: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/6zm56g/new_version_of_proposal_88149_taking_feedback/
Crosslink: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/70bpul/proposal_88149_entered_funding_required/

Get Monero Hardware Wallets

"There are currently no hardware wallets available at this time. Please check back for updates."
- https://getmonero.org/downloads/#hardware, August 2017

It's time for the Monero community to come together and realize the goal of a hardware wallet!

Status

The status of this proposal is:

PENDING FUNDING PLEDGES

Change Log

In reverse cron order.

20170915  Publish version 1.0
          Added sketchy RF integration
          Explained schedule of procurement
          Clarified work to reverse engineer
          Mentioned possible Shmoocon promotion
          Removed nonhardware based requirements
          Detailed role of microscopy in workflow
          Included more secure element details
          Zero sum corrected budget for lab
          Added plan column for FFS release

20170913  Publish version 0.9
          Added copyright statement
          Added airgap feature option
          Clarified choice of License
          Slight changes to the budget
          Slight changes to requirements
          Added related project content
          New Defunding Option section
          New Proposal Ownership section
          New Legal Summary section
          New requested Intention section
          Documented outreach to Gemalto
          Emphasized hardware focus and license

20170912  Publish version 0.8
          Nonfunctional Requirements additions
          Requirements 'note' reminder
          Time floor function removed
          Secure Element development
          New Scope Creep section
          Project plan adjustment
          Budget detailed design
          XMR rate changed to 67
          Workflow development

20170830  Publish version 0.7
          Functional Requirements additions
          Budget clarification
          New Workflow section

20170818  Publish revision 0.6

20170816  Proposal creation

20170801  DefCon Genesis

Monero Hardware Wallet

Requirements

Note: PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE DELIVERABLE (SEE SECTIONS 'DELIVERABLES' AND 'SCOPE CREEP') IS A PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD DESIGN. Other efforts exist to produce related deliverables like bootloader, firmware, enclosures, branding, modding, and derivatives.

Nonfunctional Requirements

  • Quality: The project is bodacious (bold and audacious)
  • Usability: Simple and intuitive, one hour learning time
  • Availability: Build your own and commercial models supported
  • Accessibility: One (of two total) button operation
  • Verification: Standard on board private display
  • Legal clarity: Avoidance of NDA and closed source terms
  • Legal freedom: Patent treaty via Open Invention Network
  • Open natured: All assembled parts ship with datasheets
  • Regulatory compliance: Attention to RoHS certification
  • Invulnerability: Prohibitive intrusion effort or time
  • Data integrity: Selective verification by SE cryptoanalysis
  • Reliability: MTBF to be determined and documented
  • Operating constraints: High firmware compatibility
  • Size constraints: To be determined after enclosure research
  • Resilience: Broad degree (voltage and temperature) of operation
  • Interoperability: Provision to interface with software wallets
  • Capacity: Balance between feature storage size and transistor constraint
  • Supportability: Supported through existing (forum, IRC, Reddit) channels
  • Privacy: Timer equipped for dimming, and narrow viewing angle
  • Documentation: Camera ready collection of developer documents
  • HW testability: Unpopulated debug (JTAG or similar) headers
  • FW testability: Bootloader and sample firmware templates
  • Extensibility: Open design with a common EDA CAD application
  • Marketability: Support for product design and management efforts
  • Derivability: Variation by unpopulating an overextended design
  • Portability: Portions of design forked from other projects

Functional Requirements

  • Power supply
    • 5V USB connection
    • 3V3 Battery housing
  • Security design criteria
    • Crypto: Private key in secure element¹
    • Potting: Epoxy compound (optional²)
    • Production: Non-RST debug removal
    • Airgap: Disconnected media option³
  • CPA and glitch defense
    • Dual MCU comparison circuit⁴
    • ...or external secure element⁴
  • Invasive border search protection
    • Passphrase plausible deniability
    • 48V supercap discharge circuit
    • ...or puncture destruction kit⁵
  • Intrusion detection criteria⁶
    • Ambient light interruption
    • Mechanical switch interruption
  • Physical stability
    • High rated semiconductors
    • Moisture ingress nanocoating
  • Developer friendliness
    • Development: JTAG breakout
    • Pogo pin harness option
  • User friendliness
    • Replaceable battery
    • Replaceable optional media⁴
    • Screen sized to allow QR
    • Possible RF integration³
      ...unless we want to avoid BlueBorne

¹ Depending on availability of supporting IC
² How to apply potting is documentation only
³ Research prone feature, may yield suboptimal
⁴ Depending on results of cost and size analysis
⁵ Destruction by puncture is documentation only
⁶ Independent circuit for optional model extension

Secure Element

A secure element (SE) serves to verify firmware at boot via standard DSA or ECDSA, and hopefully a vendor of hardware key storage is found that supports Monero's ED25519 elliptic curve. A private key in a real (with lock features) secure element means that even rogue firmware cannot access the key.

It seems this would be the first design to ever implement such a high degree of wallet security, but unfortunately ECDSA support depends on the hardware vendor. This is a formidable challenge.

Degree of Success

Several weeks of research will determine which of the desired secure element supported implementations are realistic. A worst case scenario is that ED25519 is completely unsupported and must be processed by firmware in SRAM, the same thing that Ledger and Trezor do. Preliminary research suggests the possibility that ARM CryptoCell circuits support hardware ED25519 calculations with a unknown (possibly no locking supported) key deployment method.

Vendor Proposal

Discussion (even before this proposal concludes) is ongoing with Microchip, Atmel, and Gemalto. We want them to produce integrated circuits according to the very easy to meet requirements.

Other Requirements

  • Review of requirements from the existing designs of Ledger, Trezor, and KeepKey
  • Blend of features from peripheral devices like Opendime, Mooltipass, and Cryptosteel

Deliverables

The Monero hardware wallet is a printed circuit board design resembling the Ledger or Trezor wallet PCBs. It may be slightly larger in size and composed of fewer (broader reach) or more (optimal electronic density) substrate layers.

Please see related RFC-HWALLET-X proposals for product design, firmware implementation, and other non hardware design work.

Scope Creep

The project is particularly vulnerable to scope creep. Votes or attempts at consensus on how to react to changing requirements are not planned. Rather, a compromise (maintaining pace of progress) is reached by attending nearly all Monero development meetings and reporting accordingly.

If contributors are interested in applied agile methods to track scope, then this can be arranged once agreement is reached in meetings.

Author

Michael is a computer scientist undergraduate with 15 years of industry (software, telecom, embedded systems) experience. He trains groups at Black Hat [1] and produces (not for sale) hardware in his circuits lab. He worked with the inventor of mod_ssl at Cable & Wireless, collaborates with WolfSSL on Atmel/Microchip IC to low powered ESP8266 platform porting, as well as MbedTLS on Atmel secure element provisioning.

He is a cryptocurrency novice of Ethereum, Bitcoin, and now Monero. He has earned the trust of his students using custom derivatives of Bus Pirate, FRDM, and NodeMCU shield devices, as well as larger companies (references on request) assigning first generation SBC hardware shield extensions on contract.

[1] https://www.blackhat.com/us-17/training/analyzing-an-iot-empire.html

Privacy

If you look carefully, you will find the privacy sensitive software development Michael has done for high profile groups.

Motivation

Michael is motivated to complete this project in order to have a Monero hardware wallet of his own, improve PCB design skills using a secure element, contribute to Monero enthusiasm, and become more active in the Monero community (by owning coins and IRC communicating frequently.)

Rejection

If all related FFS proposals are rejected, then Michael will probably be a Monero currency owner but cannot afford to contribute software, firmware, or hardware logic.

Defunding

Portions of the production machinery budget may be defunded, leading to the following added risk:

  • Unexpected scope reverse creep
  • Loss of miniaturization requirements
  • Loss of component choice requirements
  • Reduction or cancellation of samples distribution
  • Reduction or cancellation of promotion deliveries
  • Fewer test generations leading to reduced QA work
  • Introduction of new budget items to fund assembly
  • Failure of any process requiring quick or accurate manufacturing

The actions and features at risk would still be worked on a best effort basis. To be clear, this proposal has no defunded budget items and production machinery will be procured in the most expedient and inexpensive way.

Relations

Some RFC-HWALLET-X proposals are complementary and others mutually exclusive. In the best case, this pilot project will serve to launch and support other (conference badge, sponsored swag, product integrations, university research) related projects.

Budget

Production machinery

XMR Item
5 Qinsi QS-5100 reflow oven
45 Analog stereo microscope
150 NeoDen4 Pick and Place
200 Total machinery

Research equipment

XMR Item
1 Trezor
1 KeepKey
4 Ledgers
6 Chipwhisp
2 Launchpad
<1 Opendime
15 Total research

Passive and IC components

XMR Item
20 Total components

Consumable materials

XMR Item
25 Paste, substrate, nozzles

Facilities and services

XMR Item
2 Makerspace entry
68 Workspace rental
12 Datacenter, telco
80 Total facilities

Travel and promotion

XMR Item
0 Included in other items

Trips to manufacturing locations (Shenzhen or Hangzhou) will not be taken unless necessary, for example when a flight is cheaper than postal shipping or acting as a courier yields a customs free import. In those cases, trip cost is absorbed by the budget stated resource price (with nothing new to add.)

Worktime reimbursement

XMR Item
490 Lost contracts reimbursement⁷

⁷ Estimated by crossing vectors (6 months lapse, proximity obligation, hour loss) and considering used nonworktime procurements.


XMR Volatility

A 20% buffer is in place to lower risk of production loss or delay. This is partly due to Michael's lack of crypto trading experience and partly due to natural monetary fluctuation.

Total budget

XMR Item
996 Fulfillment of requirements

Note: The base rate is recalculated (95 € + 40 €) ÷ 2 resulting in 1XMR = 67EUR €. The previous base rate was 40EUR € before fluctuation and the current price is 80EUR €.


Existing Resources

A number of machines is already available including a Voltera V-One substrate printing machine, JND-983A solder dispenser, industrial air compressor, dedicated circuit production computer, and solder rework station.

The total value of already acquired machinery is estimated at 8000EUR € (120XMR.) These resources will be used but require no budget.

Nonexistent Resources

Any tools needed (see 'Production machinery') should be purchased in the first month (see 'Project Plan'), in order to avoid postponement of milestones.

Time Estimate

Ten to twenty hours per week six months long, scheduled at the author's discretion. This variability is to accommodate lack of sync in PCB printing, parts ordering, potential firmware integration, and test revisions, logistics which may take weeks to order and ship.

Time will be spent in a:

  • In house circuit lab
  • Local hacker space
  • Remote maker space

Workflow

Work is transparently carried out according to typical distributed Opensource practices. The degree of in house production is maximized to shrink the attack surface introduced by contract manufacturing as well as increase the turn around time of generational testing.

Integration

External and prior logic is researched for possible integration. This may include reverse engineering of contending designs by Opensource documentation or closed source (to the legal extent) microscopic inspection.

Design

A schematic diagram is designed using KiCad or equivalent Opensource software. A layout is derived from the schematic and integration work.

Printing

Two layer FR4 (flame retardant) substrate is printed according to the prior layout. Four layer substrate may be used, but a external contract manufacturer like Aisler or OSH Park is required for that.

Pasting

An Sn63Pb37 alloy is applied to the substrate with an injection based solder printer.

Assembly

The board is populated (stuffed) with components in a standard pick and place procedure. Manual placing is avoided due to error and delay concerns.

Reflow

The board is baked according to a timed temperature curve yielding a ready to test PCB. An experimental two sided approach may allow for extra density.

Rework

Bridged solder pads, air wires, and other mistakes are corrected.

Testing

Electrical and optical tests are manually done to identify manufacturing problems. This may include stereoscopic magnification or controlled destruction.

Programming

MCU and external flash programming applies primitive bootloader and firmware interface images.

Generation

The PCB is ready for use, and a new generation of correction and improvement follows. Start from the beginning (integration step) to optimise the existing design and fulfill more requirements.

Samples

Production samples are mailed to investors, testers, and promoters identified during Monero meetings.

Project Plan

Date Milestone FFS Payment
October Initialisation work (platform, communication, and procurement) 314XMR
Early November Tool configs, project documentation, Opendime research 168XMR
Late November Set of PCBs employing secure elements from ST and Atmel
Early December Trezor and Ledger hardware (clone) production 120XMR
Mid December Trezor and Ledger firmware (fork) programming
Late December Mock or prototype demonstration at 34C3 [2]
Early January Midterm report on Trezor and Ledger findings 120XMR
Mid January Custom design and recent feature tailoring
Late January Midterm remix in favor of Monero features
Early February New prototype demonstration at FOSDEM [3] 154XMR
Late February Correlation power analysis, glitch attack trials
Early March PCB generations (schematic and layout improvements) 120XMR
Late March Size and complexity (less or more layers) optimizations
End of term⁸ Demonstration video of a release grade⁹ manufactured board

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_Communication_Congress
[3] https://www.fosdem.org/2018/

⁸ Six month conclusion
⁹ Post prototype


Funds are asymmetrically distributed, due to terms of machinery procurement and facilities use. Some correction (not receiving work time reimbursement the first month) attempts to balance this asymmetry.


Progress Reports

Progress is reported in bimonthly Monero developer meetings on the IRC developer channel.

Continuation Plan (Pending New RFC and Revote)

Date Milestone
April First viable wallet with hello world firmware
May Invitation documents produced with instructions
June Virtual community event for alpha testers, demo
August Official release at Black Hat and DefCon

Ownership

The Monero Project owns this (Opensource) proposal, the blueprint-like result of a month's careful deliberation and research. The author contributed it by uploading content to the forum. Readers are free to print and hand it to investors, colleagues, university professors, or whoever else, in order to start a hardware project of their own.

Copyright

Source files (text and binary) of all work state Copyright (c) 2017-2018, The Monero Project.

License

CERN Open Hardware License 1.2

Being a hardware project, no software license is used. Instead, a open hardware license is applied whose terms resemble the other Monero projects' (BSD|MIT) licenses. Patents are more relevant to hardware projects so to counter risk of conflict the CERN OHL is used.

Note: While deliberating between TAPR and CERN, online chats led to a preference for CERN due to its:

  • Poison pill
  • Conciseness
  • Bodaciousness
  • Lack of lame conditions
  • Lack of Eric Raymond complaints
  • Adoption by other like minded projects

Legal Summary

The legal terms mentioned in this text are chosen with the intent of maintaining free and open access to the work. Some call this intellectual property (IP) and others consider deliverables (see section 'Deliverables'.)

These intentions are no different than other Monero projects, and the community is unified in encouraging freedom. Like any other similarly licensed Opensource project, groups and individuals may enjoy the free and open terms as specified in the license.

Intentions

The project intends to serve as a launchpad for small (one man-hour) to large (one man-year) efforts at distributing Monero featured wallet hardware. Several requirements (see section 'Non/Functional Requirements') support the derivation, customization, marketing, and teaching of how to begin commercialization. All are welcome to participate in this way, and the hope is that we end up with both collaborating and competing groups.

Brainstorm

This project proposal was first discussed by Michael, endogenic, and anonimal at the Monero themed party during DefCon 2017.

Inclusion

Teamwork and collaboration from any competent person is encouraged. Outreach to other hardware makers mutually benefits the respective communities.

Promotion

The hackerspace mailing lists and IRC channels for C-Base, MuCCC, and the Noisebridge will serve to promote, while dedicated lists and channels will serve to support. Outreach is conducted with the EFF, NLNet, and other like minded groups.

Midterm deliverables will be taken to CCC congress at Leipzig in December, possibly Shmoocon in January, and prototype or release grade devices will be distributed at DefCon 2018 (see project plan.) It may be Michael that makes these visits or another person familiar with the project.

Replies: 78
michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: What is this? An rfp or a status update?
Answer: It is what the author understands as the best way to propose an FFS for a project yet to be launched. The identifier 'RFC' stands for 'request for comments', to convey meaning that the community is explicitly invited to discuss and amend the proposal.

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: What are some reasons to reject this proposal?
Answer 1: It is speculated that a Monero supporting wallet might be created by waiting for the Ledger or Trezor community to produce one.
Answer 2: Once a viable hardware design is reached by this project, it might be too much work for the Monero community to complete a full scale product launch (FW, enclosure, maintenance, logistics.)

Note: A separate proposal RFC-HWALLET-2 addresses some of these concerns:

https://forum.getmonero.org/7/open-tasks/88160/monero-firmware-for-ledger-wallet/

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: What are the benefits of a dedicated hardware wallet as opposed to adoption of RFC-HWALLET-2?
Answer: Too complex to answer in a comment box. Possibilities include the control over roadmap, featureset, branding, IC and component choice, fostering of community identity, and decreasing risk of another year with no hw wallet.

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: What is an example of a dedicated featureset?
Answer 1: It might be possible to offer a optional lock down fuse blowout of a private key's read registers.
Answer 2: To defend against border searches, this design might allow for a private key's total destruction, something existing hardware wallets don't support.

Question: What is an example of IC and component choice?
Answer: To increase firmware security and glitch defense even more, the dedicated design might contain a less expensive ST31H128 plus an additional verifier chip like the ATSHA204A.

drfred posted 6 years ago Replies: 1 | Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

It appears that more and more smart guys have figured out that the montenero community is a generous one, however the proposal at hand almost feels like trying to take advantage of this. While I really like the idea of a dedicated hardware wallet I certainly won't support this proposal in its current form, which is a premiere for me.

michael posted 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Recent opinions from other sources (thanks to drfred for posting here) include...

Pro: Better to have more than one (since Trezor is problematic) viable hardware wallet for Monero users to choose from. Vendor choice is good.

Contra: The project will not succeed, or the funds are better used in other areas of Monero development.

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Opinion: If the project starts, then there should be coordination with other development like RingCT, RuffCT, Kovri, and whatever else is unique to Monero.

Comment: That's right, and would attend IRC meetings and publish progress reports, trying to sync releases with other relevant development.

Note to myself: Don't forget to review other projects' roadmaps and adjust the RFC-HWALLET-X timeline and project plan accordingly (still at 0.6 and prone to change for just these reasons.)

This is maybe another benefit to controlling the tech behind a dedicated wallet (RFC-HWALLET-1) rather than RFC-HWALLET-2, since we can increase flash size in order to support unique Monero features.

Who (dis)agrees?

michael posted 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: Monero XMR value is too volatile, can we edit this proposal to list costs in fiat currency?

Answer 1: No, this proposal should remain Monero based.
Answer 2: If you want to propose a similar project without budgeting in Monero XMR, just copy all relevant text. The project is fully Opensource and Michael is happy to play a role.

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: Can we stop using Monero's Forum, XMR, and FFS? Can we start using a competing method like Indiegogo, Y Combinator, Initial Coin Offering, Kickstarter, or Tindie?

Answer: Yes, if you:

  • Learn how the foreign platform works
  • Do the communication and accounting

...then Michael will carry out all obligations of this proposal in your method of choice.

michael posted 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: Does this proposal resemble the structure of typical crowdfunding campaigns?

Answer 1: This FFS proposal shares certain crowdfunding features like early hardware shipments to donors.
Answer 2: Only the minimum administration and bureaucracy is carried out, so the degree of FFS similarity to other funding platforms requires an analysis few are interested to do.

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: Why are the costs so much?

Answer 1: Hardware design requires a lab equipped with physical devices. The machines already bought for this project each cost between €1000 and €10,000. Others are yet to be acquired.
Answer 2: The nature (proximity to lab and lead time of contract manufacturing) of tasks prohibits concurrent work, leading to loss of contracts during the six month period.
Answer 3: Limits of in house engineering require expensive third party contracts like decapping service or possibly scanning electron microscopy.
Answer 4: A floor function has been applied to the hour estimate.

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: Will the project fail due to underestimation?

Answer: No, there are no underestimated values. The approximations of resources, budget, and duration needed are based on past experience and accurate enough to properly manage the project.

michael edited 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Question: Will any generated income proceeds from sales be 'not for profit' and used to fund future projects?
Answer 1: Whoever markets and sells the deliverables can direct funds to future projects, however it's unclear if the yet to be chosen Opensource license (which one?) will be able to force a nonprofit scheme. Please give your opinion!
Answer 2: A branding system (DefCon Prerelease, Anniversary Edition, etcetera) is supported via a one page documentation 'How to Produce and Market' with the goal of assisting projects wishing to sell in order to fund their needs.

Reply to: drfred
anonimal posted 6 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

>the proposal at hand almost feels like trying to take advantage of this.

I see no evidence of this.

anonimal posted 6 years ago Replies: 3 | Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

I think this is a fine proposal and michael's community presence is an invaluable one.

>6 months at 10/hr a week for total 2000 XMR

For 2000 XMR, would you be able to work 40/hr a week? If not, the community may be more inclined to donate if the 2000 were set to 1000 or lower.

Does your budget include travel and promotion?