Wallet Logo

One Key Mini

Latest release: ?? ( 16th October 2021 ) 🔍 Last analysed 28th December 2022 . Review might be outdated
8th December 2020

Without public source of the reviewed release available, this product cannot be verified!

As part of our Methodology, we ask:

Is the source code publicly available?

If the answer is "no", we mark it as "No source for current release found".

A wallet that claims to not give the provider the means to steal the users’ funds might actually be lying. In the spirit of “Don’t trust - verify!” you don’t want to take the provider at his word, but trust that people hunting for fame and bug bounties could actually find flaws and back-doors in the wallet so the provider doesn’t dare to put these in.

Back-doors and flaws are frequently found in closed source products but some remain hidden for years. And even in open source security software there might be catastrophic flaws undiscovered for years.

An evil wallet provider would certainly prefer not to publish the code, as hiding it makes audits orders of magnitude harder.

For your security, you thus want the code to be available for review.

If the wallet provider doesn’t share up to date code, our analysis stops there as the wallet could steal your funds at any time, and there is no protection except the provider’s word.

“Up to date” strictly means that any instance of the product being updated without the source code being updated counts as closed source. This puts the burden on the provider to always first release the source code before releasing the product’s update. This paragraph is a clarification to our rules following a little poll.

We are not concerned about the license as long as it allows us to perform our analysis. For a security audit, it is not necessary that the provider allows others to use their code for a competing wallet. You should still prefer actual open source licenses as a competing wallet won’t use the code without giving it careful scrutiny.

The product cannot be independently verified. If the provider puts your funds at risk on purpose or by accident, you will probably not know about the issue before people start losing money. If the provider is more criminally inclined he might have collected all the backups of all the wallets, ready to be emptied at the press of a button. The product might have a formidable track record but out of distress or change in management turns out to be evil from some point on, with nobody outside ever knowing before it is too late.

But we also ask:

Does our review and verdict apply to their latest release?

If the answer is "no", we mark it as "Review might be outdated".

Verdicts apply to very specific releases of products and never to the product as a whole. A new release of a product can change the product completely and thus also the verdict. This product remains listed according to its latest verdict but readers are advised to do their own research as this product might have changed for the better or worse.

This meta verdict is applied in cases of reviews that we identify as requiring an update.

This meta verdict applies to all products with verdict “reproducible” as soon as a new version is released until we test that new version, too. It also applies in cases where issues we opened are marked as resolved by the provider.

If we had more resources, we would update reviews more timely instead of assigning this meta verdict ;)

Help spread awareness for build reproducibility

Please help us spread the word discussing transparency with One Key Mini  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.

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 2022-12-28: The provider sent us a link to claims of this product being open source and reproducible. We have to check this.

Product Description

Not to be confused with the OneKey - Limited Edition No Source! Rev. Outdated , the One Key Mini supports many cryptocurrencies including: BTC, LTC, BCH, ETH, BTG, DASH, USDT, DOGE and more. It supports many DeFi protocols and can connect to Metamask.

It is also compatible with Trezor, Metamask, Exodus, Bitcoin Core + Specter, BTCPayServe, Electrum-LTC, Nano Wallet, Electrum, Mycelium, MyEtherWallet, Bitcoin Core + HWI, Electrum- DASH and EtherWall.

According to the FAQ, even if the device was damaged, it is possible to recover via a mnemonic phrase.

The private keys are created offline, secured and airgapped. The mnemonic phrase is provided during initial device setup.

One Key Mini User Manual

OneKey repeatedly claims that their software and firmwares are Open Source. However, the repository linked from their website indicates that it is already deprecated.

Digging deeper into their User Service Agreement, we find this:

OneKeyOpen Source Code (“OneKey OSC”): means the partial software code of OneKey that Company has publicized and made open-source. Users may use (include further development) such open source software code in accordance with relevant Open Source License and notices of the Company.

The key word is “partial”. Making the source code only partially available indicates that certain functions are not made public. This is noted in an issue on OneKey’s Github, but it has not received any attention.

Whether it’s a few lines of code that references a script downloaded from another source, users simply would not know.