no-compromise open source

open source isn’t a feature. it’s survival.

the moment you compromise, you’ve already lost.

you can’t “halfway” open-source critical infrastructure. you either expose it to scrutiny or you build a ticking time bomb, waiting for some state actor, deep-pocketed institution, or just some random hacker to tear it apart.

transparency is security. hiding flaws doesn’t make them disappear—it just means you don’t see the attack coming.

apple’s secure enclave? cracked.
intel’s SGX? compromised.
banking systems? routinely breached, and users never know.

the worst part? when they get hacked, they cover it up. they have to. their business depends on your ignorance.

crypto was built to eliminate trust, but if your hardware wallet, key manager, or consensus layer is closed-source, you’ve already lost.

the easiest way to kill crypto isn’t banning it—it’s undermining it from within. hidden backdoors, compromised secure elements, firmware you can’t audit. if your keys are in the wrong hands, it’s over.

real security means full-stack open source.

  • hardware? no black-box secure elements.
  • firmware? verifiable, auditable, reproducible.
  • software? completely open, down to the build process.

if any part of your stack is closed-source, you’re trusting the enemy. and in security, trust is a vulnerability.

some projects start open, then compromise—locking down firmware, adding proprietary components, “for security reasons.”

bullshit.

that’s how the system corrupts itself. little concessions add up. “it’s just the secure enclave.” “it’s just the signing process.” suddenly, you’re locked into something you can’t verify.

there’s no halfway open-source. it’s all or nothing.

the only way forward? build the alternative.

  • no black-box security
  • no closed-source secure elements
  • no “trust us, it’s safe.”

if we want crypto to survive, we need end-to-end verifiability.

security you can’t audit isn’t security.

Edit