13:43:43 <n1oc> [CCS Proposals] selsta opened merge request #697: selsta full-time monero development (3 months) (22) https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/697
20:05:04 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> > <tobtoht> I don't think we should allow third party hardware integrations in the main repo. We can set up a generic USB interface, and if a vendor wants to offer Monero support they can go ahead and implement that. We have given Trezor/Ledger way too much leverage over our code and dependencies.
20:05:29 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> Does anyone have any thoughts on whether this should be for the 'hot' or 'cold' path? I think the latter would make much more sense
20:05:50 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> A theoretical generic USB interface, that is
20:06:05 <br-m> <ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Both? Wdym
20:07:41 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> I'm talking about device.hpp vs. device_cold.hpp
20:08:02 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> Currently, Ledger uses the 'hot' one and Trezor uses the 'cold' one
20:08:15 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> Ledger's approach is a lot more interactive and seems somewhat fragile
20:08:39 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> Like, you're forcing vendors to implement arbitrary elliptic curve steps instead of support for signing different blobs
20:09:54 <br-m> <jpk68:matrix.org> Then there's also the question of the wire format (Protobuf? CBOR?), and what transports should be used. Trezor's current model seems pretty reasonable.