Wallet Logo

Unstoppable Wallet

latest release: 0.21.4 last analysed  15th June 2021
Reproducible when tested
3.9 ★★★★★
398 ratings
10thousand
18th December 2018

Jump to verdict 

Older reviews (show 17 of 23 reproducible)

Help spread awareness for build reproducibility

Please follow Unstoppable Wallet and thank them for being reproducible  via their Twitter!

Disclaimer

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.

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 

Here is the output using our test script on the binary from Google Play:

Results:
appId:          io.horizontalsystems.bankwallet
signer:         c1899493e440489178b8748851b72cbed50c282aaa8c03ae236a4652f8c4f27b
apkVersionName: 0.21.4
apkVersionCode: 49
apkHash:        351ddd179d58b9ebdcb80cccd987caab7ea381949db4baad2689214a7c6c94d1

Diff:
Only in /tmp/fromPlay_io.horizontalsystems.bankwallet_49/META-INF: MANIFEST.MF
Only in /tmp/fromPlay_io.horizontalsystems.bankwallet_49/META-INF: RELEASEK.RSA
Only in /tmp/fromPlay_io.horizontalsystems.bankwallet_49/META-INF: RELEASEK.SF

Revision, tag (and its signature):

which is what we want to see to give this wallet the verdict: reproducible

Thank you to Horizontal Systems for repeat donations

(lw)

Verdict Explained

Reproducible when tested  

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".