Wallet Logo

TenX - Buy Bitcoin & Crypto Card

Latest release: 3.25.1 ( 11th November 2020 ) 🔍 Last analysed 3rd September 2021 . Custodial: The provider holds the keys Not functioning anymore
3.1 ★★★★★
1076 ratings
100 thousand
23rd November 2017

Jump to verdict 

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.

If you find something we should include, you can create an issue or edit this analysis yourself and create a merge request for your changes.

The Analysis 

UPDATE: 2021-09-01

New sign-ups and deposits have been disabled, and even though your funds remain safe, we encourage you to withdraw your funds from your TenX Wallet at your earliest convenience.

TenX will start “sunsetting their services soon.” As such and with no new service replacement announced at the time of this review, it would be best to label this app as defunct.

Old Analysis

This app’s description hints at being custodial with:

Send cryptocurrencies to other TenX Wallet users for free

as there is no transaction fee if the transaction is just an update of their centralized database.

As the core product of TenX is to spend your Bitcoins via a credit card, they probably want to be in control of the coins and not surrender this control to the user. We assume it is custodial.

Our verdict: not verifiable.

(lw, dg)

Verdict Explained

As the provider of this product holds the keys, verifiability of the product is not relevant to the security of the funds!

As part of our Methodology, we ask:

Is the product self-custodial? If not, we tag it Custodial!

A custodial service is a service where the funds are held by a third party like the provider. The custodial service can at any point steal all the funds of all the users at their discretion. Our investigations stop there.

Some services might claim their setup is super secure, that they don’t actually have access to the funds, or that the access is shared between multiple parties. For our evaluation of it being a wallet, these details are irrelevant. They might be a trustworthy Bitcoin bank and they might be a better fit for certain users than being your own bank but our investigation still stops there as we are only interested in wallets.

Products that claim to be non-custodial but feature custodial accounts without very clearly marking those as custodial are also considered “custodial” as a whole to avoid misguiding users that follow our assessment.

This verdict means that the provider might or might not publish source code and maybe it is even possible to reproduce the build from the source code but as it is custodial, the provider already has control over the funds, so it is not a wallet where you would be in exclusive control of your funds.

We have to acknowledge that a huge majority of Bitcoiners are currently using custodial Bitcoin banks. If you do, please:

  • Do your own research if the provider is trust-worthy!
  • Check if you know at least enough about them so you can sue them when you have to!
  • Check if the provider is under a jurisdiction that will allow them to release your funds when you need them?
  • Check if the provider is taking security measures proportional to the amount of funds secured? If they have a million users and don’t use cold storage, that hot wallet is a million times more valuable for hackers to attack. A million times more effort will be taken by hackers to infiltrate their security systems.

But we also ask:

Is the product still supported by the still existing provider? If not, we tag it Defunct!

Discontinued products or worse, products of providers that are not active anymore, are problematic, especially if they were not formerly reproducible and well audited to be self-custodial following open standards. If the provider hasn’t answered inquiries for a year but their server is still running or similar circumstances might get this verdict, too.