Green: Bitcoin Walletlatest release: 3.5.4 last analysed 1st April 2021
Older reviews (show 15 of 16 reproducible)
Help spread awareness for build reproducibility
Please follow Green: Bitcoin Wallet and thank them for being reproducible via their Twitter!
The following Analysis is not a full code review! We plan to make code reviews available in the future but even then it will never be a stamp of approval but rather a list of incidents and questionable coding practice. Nasa sends probes to space that crash due to software bugs despite a huge budget and stringent scrutiny.
Do your own research!
Try out searching for "lost bitcoins", "stole my money" or "scammers" together with the wallet's name, even if you think the wallet is generally trustworthy. For all the bigger wallets you will find accusations. Make sure you understand why they were made and if you are comfortable with the provider's reaction.
With this script we get:
Results: appId: com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet signer: 32f9cc00b13fbeace51e2fb51df482044e42ad34a9bd912f179fedb16a42970e apkVersionName: 3.5.4 apkVersionCode: 22000354 apkHash: 4ed9729881676b84d7ed65b0f0bd583c11c465186e896e96888c5d323e8c5002 Diff: Files /tmp/fromPlay_com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet_22000354/apktool.yml and /tmp/fromBuild_com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet_22000354/apktool.yml differ Only in /tmp/fromPlay_com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet_22000354/original/META-INF: GREENADD.RSA Only in /tmp/fromPlay_com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet_22000354/original/META-INF: GREENADD.SF Only in /tmp/fromPlay_com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet_22000354/original/META-INF: MANIFEST.MF Revision, tag (and its signature): object 81f04a059d23f9447176c538f775d5aef5cb09af type commit tag release_3.5.4 tagger Luca Vaccaro <firstname.lastname@example.org> 1616626426 +0100 Release 3.5.4
which is what we want to see to give this wallet the verdict: reproducible
At the time of this analysis, the app as downloaded from the platform was reproducible from the code provided by the developers!
The app can be independently verified. If the provider puts your funds at risk on purpose or by accident, security researchers can see this if they care to look. It also means that inside the company engineers can verify that the release manager is releasing the app based on code known to all engineers on the team. A scammer would have to work under the potential eyes of security researchers. He would have to take more effort in hiding any exploit.
"Reproducible" does not mean "verified". There is good reason to believe that security researchers as of today would not detect very blatant backdoors in the public source code before it gets exploited, much less if the attacker takes moderate efforts to hide it.
To understand why some lines of difference are ok and others not one has to consider how app signing works. Android supports currently 3 signing schemes and in version 1 signing the signature is put inside the application file. As the tester must not have the release signing key, those files necessarily are missing or differ from the version on Google Play. The file "apktool.yml" was never part of the app and is generated by the analysis tool "apktool".
Share onTwitter Facebook LinkedIn
Or embed a widget in your website
<iframe src="/widget/#appId=com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet&theme=auto&style=short" name="_ts" style="min-width: 180px;border: 0;border-radius: 10px;max-width:280px;height: 130px;" > </iframe>
<iframe src="/widget/#appId=com.greenaddress.greenbits_android_wallet&theme=auto&style=long" style="max-width:100%;width:342px;border:0;border-radius:10px;min-height: 510px;" > </iframe>