Muun - Bitcoin and Lightning WalletLatest release: 49.3 ( 27th April 2022 ) 🔍 Last analysed 8th May 2022 . Not reproducible from source provided
Older reviews (show 0 of 5 reproducible)
Help spread awareness for build reproducibility
Please help us spread the word, asking Muun - Bitcoin and Lightning Wallet to support reproducible builds via their Twitter!
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.
The Analysis ¶
With this test script (?) we get:
===== Begin Results ===== appId: io.muun.apollo signer: 026ae0ac859cc32adf2d4e7aa909daf902f40db0b4fe6138358026fd62836ad1 apkVersionName: 49.3 apkVersionCode: 903 verdict: appHash: 70fcd9491963e6fe27f9efd41d3c90abf63539d0f9528de8abbad964675de723 commit: e65b56b7128094ef7c188d00828747ee01b3fad6 Diff: Files /tmp/fromPlay_io.muun.apollo_903/classes2.dex and /tmp/fromBuild_io.muun.apollo_903/classes2.dex differ Files /tmp/fromPlay_io.muun.apollo_903/classes.dex and /tmp/fromBuild_io.muun.apollo_903/classes.dex differ Only in /tmp/fromPlay_io.muun.apollo_903/META-INF: APOLLORE.RSA Only in /tmp/fromPlay_io.muun.apollo_903/META-INF: APOLLORE.SF Only in /tmp/fromPlay_io.muun.apollo_903/META-INF: MANIFEST.MF Files /tmp/fromPlay_io.muun.apollo_903/resources.arsc and /tmp/fromBuild_io.muun.apollo_903/resources.arsc differ Revision, tag (and its signature): object e65b56b7128094ef7c188d00828747ee01b3fad6 type commit tag v49.3 tagger acrespo <firstname.lastname@example.org> 1651007577 -0300 v49.3 ===== End Results =====
Sadly that is not verifiable.
We could not verify that the provided code matches the binary!
As part of our Methodology, we ask:Is the published binary matching the published source code? If not, we tag it Unreproducible!
Published code doesn’t help much if it is not what the published binary was built from. That is why we try to reproduce the binary. We
- obtain the binary from the provider
- compile the published source code using the published build instructions into a binary
- compare the two binaries
- we might spend some time working around issues that are easy to work around
If this fails, we might search if other revisions match or if we can deduct the source of the mismatch but generally consider it on the provider to provide the correct source code and build instructions to reproduce the build, so we usually open a ticket in their code repository.
In any case, the result is a discrepancy between the binary we can create and the binary we can find for download and any discrepancy might leak your backup to the server on purpose or by accident.
As we cannot verify that the source provided is the source the binary was compiled from, this category is only slightly better than closed source but for now we have hope projects come around and fix verifiability issues.
Share onTwitter Facebook LinkedIn
Or embed a widget in your website
<iframe src="https://walletscrutiny.com/widget/#appId=android/io.muun.apollo&theme=auto&style=short" name="_ts" style="min-width:180px;border:0;border-radius:10px;max-width:280px;min-height:30px;"> </iframe>
<iframe src="https://walletscrutiny.com/widget/#appId=android/io.muun.apollo&theme=auto&style=long" style="max-width:100%;width:342px;border:0;border-radius:10px;min-height:290px;"> </iframe>