Wallet Logo

MoneyPipe: HD Bitcoin Wallet

Latest release: 3.9.1 ( 12th February 2022 ) 🔍 Last analysed 31st May 2022 . No source for current release found Not functioning anymore
5 ★★★★★
1 ratings
15th June 2020

Jump to verdict 

Help spread awareness for build reproducibility

Please help us spread the word discussing transparency with MoneyPipe: HD Bitcoin Wallet  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 2022-05-17: This app is not available anymore.

(Analysis from Android review)

App Description

MoneyPipe HD multi-currency crypto wallet is unlike any other — it’s not a cloud wallet or exchange. It’s a full-fledged Hierarchical Deterministic wallet with an independent infrastructure. The private keys are always solely under the user’s control and never leave the device.

Third Party Information

Once we determined that this app is non-custodial, we then proceeded to checks if they have made the source code publicly available.

We were able to find a bitcointalk.org thread about this topic which was posted on August 19, 2020.

A member named o_e_l_e_o posted:

Is your code open source? It says it is on your website (https://moneypipe.com/hd-wallet) under the FAQ section at the bottom, but I cannot find a link to a GitHub repository.

To which MoneyPipe developer replied:

We are planning to make the app’s source code public in a few version updates - we still need to give it a good polish.

The App

We tested the app and it has a bitcoin wallet with send and receive function. It also provided options to backup via a 12-word seed phrase.

Verdict

Contrary to the Bitcoin thread above, we could no longer locate any mention of the project being open source. Searching for the appID ‘com.beecrypt.beecrypthd’ does not yield any relevant or related results on GitHub.

(dg)

Verdict Explained

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 not, we tag it No Source!

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.

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.