- open source isnât a feature - itâs survival
- the moment you compromise, youâve already lost
- canât halfway critical infrastructure
- either expose it to scrutiny or build a ticking time bomb
- waiting for state actors, institutions, or hackers to tear it apart
- transparency IS security
- hiding flaws doesnât make them disappear
- just means you donât see the attack coming
- cypherpunks taught us this decades ago
- appleâs secure enclave? cracked
- intelâs SGX? compromised
- banking systems? routinely breached, users never know
- worst part: when hacked, they cover it up
- they have to - business depends on your ignorance
- built to eliminate trust
- but if hardware wallet, key manager, or consensus layer is closed-source
- youâve already lost
- building opposite of resistance infrastructure
- building dependence
- easiest way to kill crypto isnât banning it
- itâs undermining from within
- hidden backdoors
- compromised secure elements
- firmware you canât audit
- if keys are in wrong hands, itâs over
- full-stack open source
- hardware: no black-box secure elements
- firmware: verifiable, auditable, reproducible
- software: completely open, down to build process
- if any part is closed-source, youâre trusting the enemy
- in security, trust is a vulnerability
- some projects start open, then compromise
- locking down firmware
- adding proprietary components
- âfor security reasonsâ - bullshit
- thatâs how system corrupts itself
- little concessions add up
- âjust the secure enclaveâ
- âjust the signing processâ
- suddenly locked into something unverifiable
- no halfway open-source
- itâs all or nothing
- open everything or open nothing
- build the alternative
- no black-box security
- no closed-source secure elements
- no âtrust us, itâs safeâ
- crypto needs end-to-end verifiability
- deep state knows this
- why they push for backdoors and âsecureâ black boxes
- security you canât audit isnât security