BlockWallet - AI risk analysis

beta

AI risk analysis - BlockWallet (2025-04-29 17:35:45)

Below is a comprehensive analysis of BlockWallet (official website: https://blockwallet.io/) based on the requested criteria. The analysis covers online complaints, risk level assessment, website security, WHOIS lookup, IP and hosting, social media presence, red flags, regulatory status, user precautions, and potential brand confusion.

1. Overview of BlockWallet ¶

BlockWallet is a self-custodial, non-custodial Web3 cryptocurrency wallet designed for privacy and security. It operates as a browser extension, supporting Ethereum, BNB Chain, Polygon, and other EVM-compatible chains. It emphasizes user control over private keys, advanced privacy features (e.g., Privacy Proxies, zk-SNARKs), and protection against phishing and front-running attacks. The wallet integrates with hardware wallets (Ledger, Trezor, Keystone) and offers features like token swapping, bridging, and gas tracking.

2. Online Complaint Information ¶

Trustpilot Reviews:
BlockWallet has a 4-star rating on Trustpilot based on 39 reviews as of July 2023.
Positive feedback highlights ease of use, robust security, and privacy features. Users praise its simplicity, compatibility with DeFi protocols, and hardware wallet integration. Example: “Perfect blend of simplicity and functionality… rock-solid security features.”
Negative feedback includes limited support for certain networks (e.g., PulseChain autoload tokens) and lack of full-screen mode, with some users finding it only marginally better than MetaMask. Example: “It’s just a tad better than MetaMask… dealing with tokens became a headache.”
Other Platforms:
No significant complaints were found on platforms like Reddit, Bitcointalk, or other crypto forums based on available data. However, the relatively small review sample size (39 reviews) suggests limited user feedback, which could indicate either low adoption or a niche user base.
Red Flags:
Limited negative feedback, but complaints about missing features (e.g., full-screen mode, specific chain support) suggest potential gaps in functionality for advanced users.
The small number of reviews may indicate low visibility or user engagement, which could be a concern for assessing long-term reliability. Risk Level: Low to Moderate based on complaints. Positive reviews dominate, but the small sample size and minor functionality issues warrant caution.

3. Risk Level Assessment ¶

Nature of Service:
As a self-custodial wallet, BlockWallet reduces counterparty risk compared to centralized exchanges, as users control their private keys. However, self-custody introduces risks like loss of private keys or seed phrases, which could result in permanent asset loss.
The wallet’s focus on privacy (e.g., hiding IP addresses, zk-SNARKs) mitigates risks of tracking or data exposure but does not eliminate vulnerabilities like phishing or user error.
Potential Risks:
Phishing and Social Engineering: Like all crypto wallets, BlockWallet users are vulnerable to phishing attacks targeting private keys or seed phrases.
Smart Contract Risks: Interactions with DeFi protocols or DApps via BlockWallet could expose users to smart contract vulnerabilities or exploits.
Third-Party Reliance: While BlockWallet emphasizes self-custody, it relies on third-party node providers and integrations (e.g., DeFi protocols), which could introduce risks if these providers fail or are compromised.
Regulatory Uncertainty: The unclear regulatory status of cryptographic tokens and wallets in many jurisdictions could impact BlockWallet’s operations or user access.
Mitigation Features:
Privacy Proxies to hide IP addresses and metadata.
Token allowance management to reduce DApp exploit risks.
Front-running bot protection and phishing detection protocols.
Regular security audits by top-tier firms, with reports publicly available. Risk Level: Moderate. Self-custodial wallets inherently reduce some risks, but user errors, phishing, and third-party dependencies remain concerns.

4. Website Security Tools ¶

SSL/TLS Encryption:
The website (https://blockwallet.io/) uses HTTPS with a valid SSL certificate, ensuring encrypted communication between the user and the server.
No specific SSL provider details (e.g., Let’s Encrypt, DigiCert) were available in the provided data, but HTTPS is standard for legitimate crypto platforms.
Security Headers:
No detailed analysis of HTTP security headers (e.g., Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options) was available. Legitimate wallets typically implement these to prevent cross-site scripting (XSS) or clickjacking attacks.
Open-Source Code:
BlockWallet’s code is open-source and available on GitHub (29 repositories), allowing public review for transparency and security.
Regular audits by top-tier security firms enhance trust in the codebase.
Phishing Protection:
The website and wallet include protocols to detect phishing attempts and warn users of suspicious activities.
WOT Safety Check:
Web of Trust (WOT) provides customer service reviews for blockwallet.io, but no specific safety score was mentioned. Red Flags:
Lack of detailed information on specific website security tools (e.g., WAF, DDoS protection) in the provided data.
Users should verify the authenticity of the browser extension from official sources (e.g., Chrome Web Store) to avoid fake versions. Risk Level: Low. The use of HTTPS, open-source code, and audits suggests robust security, but limited data on additional website protections warrants caution.

5. WHOIS Lookup ¶

Domain Information:
Domain: blockwallet.io
Registrar: Not specified in the provided data, but .io domains are typically registered through providers like Namecheap, GoDaddy, or Cloudflare.
Registration Date: Not provided, but the website has been active since at least 2023 based on Trustpilot reviews.
Registrant: Likely Business Variety Limited (Company ID: 3189974), based in Tallinn, Estonia (Jõe tn 3-301, 10151).
Privacy Protection:
WHOIS data is likely redacted for privacy, as is common for legitimate businesses using domain registrars with privacy services (e.g., Cloudflare, WhoisGuard).
Red Flags:
Lack of specific WHOIS details (e.g., exact registration date, registrar) in the provided data limits transparency.
The use of a .io domain, while common in crypto, is sometimes associated with less stringent regulatory oversight compared to .com or .org. Risk Level: Moderate. The association with a registered company in Estonia is positive, but incomplete WHOIS data requires further verification.

6. IP and Hosting Analysis ¶

Hosting Provider:
The website is hosted on Webflow (blockwallet-sites.webflow.io), a popular platform for building and hosting websites.
Webflow is a reputable provider with strong security features, including DDoS protection and automatic SSL.
IP Address:
Specific IP address details were not provided in the data. Webflow-hosted sites typically use cloud-based infrastructure (e.g., AWS, Google Cloud), which enhances resilience but obscures exact IP details.
Geolocation:
Likely hosted in a major data center (e.g., US, EU) due to Webflow’s infrastructure, but no specific geolocation was confirmed.
Red Flags:
No evidence of suspicious hosting (e.g., shared hosting with known malicious sites).
The use of Webflow is standard but may limit customization for advanced security features compared to self-hosted solutions. Risk Level: Low. Hosting on Webflow suggests reliability, but lack of IP-specific data prevents a complete assessment.

Official Channels:
BlockWallet maintains a presence on platforms like Twitter/X, GitHub, and likely Discord or Telegram (common for crypto projects).
The GitHub page (https://github.com/block-wallet) shows active development with 29 repositories.
Events like NOBS Talks (e.g., October 19th, with NFT badges) indicate community engagement.
Activity:
Regular updates, such as Firefox extension support and staking discussions, suggest an active team.
Positive user sentiment on Trustpilot aligns with social media engagement.
Red Flags:
No evidence of fake or suspicious social media accounts impersonating BlockWallet.
Limited data on the size or activity of community channels (e.g., Discord member count, Telegram activity) prevents a full assessment. Risk Level: Low. Active and legitimate social media presence supports credibility, but users should verify official handles to avoid scams.

8. Red Flags and Potential Risk Indicators ¶

Cloning Concerns:
A source noted that pixer.io cloned content from blockwallet.io, indicating potential brand confusion or malicious imitation.
Users must ensure they access the official site (https://blockwallet.io/) and extension to avoid fake versions.
Limited User Feedback:
The small number of reviews (39 on Trustpilot) may indicate low adoption or limited public exposure, which could mask unreported issues.
Regulatory Uncertainty:
The unclear regulatory status of crypto wallets in many jurisdictions poses a risk, as future regulations could affect operations or user access.
High-Risk Investment Warning:
Trustpilot notes that BlockWallet “may be associated with high-risk investments,” a standard warning for crypto projects but still a concern.
Third-Party Dependencies:
Reliance on node providers and DeFi integrations introduces risks if these third parties fail or are compromised.
Brand Confusion:
Potential confusion with Block.io (a different wallet hosting service) or Blockaid (a blockchain security platform).
The name “BlockWallet” is generic and could be mimicked by malicious actors. Risk Level: Moderate. Cloning concerns, regulatory uncertainty, and limited feedback are notable risks, but no major red flags suggest fraud or illegitimacy.

9. Website Content Analysis ¶

Content Quality:
The website (https://blockwallet.io/) is professionally designed, with clear explanations of features like Privacy Proxies, token allowance management, and hardware wallet support.
It emphasizes privacy, security, and user control, aligning with the needs of Web3 users.
Transparency:
The site provides a Risk Disclaimer outlining risks like private key loss, hacking, and regulatory changes.
Terms & Conditions are available, operated by Business Variety Limited in Estonia.
Open-source code and audit reports enhance transparency.
Red Flags:
No mention of specific licensing or regulatory compliance (e.g., AML/KYC requirements), which is common for non-custodial wallets but may concern some users.
The use of Webflow hosting (blockwallet-sites.webflow.io) alongside blockwallet.io could confuse users if not clearly communicated. Risk Level: Low. The website is professional and transparent, with minor concerns about regulatory clarity.

10. Regulatory Status ¶

Jurisdiction:
Operated by Business Variety Limited in Tallinn, Estonia, a crypto-friendly jurisdiction.
Estonia has a relatively permissive regulatory framework for crypto, but non-custodial wallets typically face fewer regulatory requirements than custodial services.
Compliance:
No evidence of specific licenses (e.g., VASP registration) in the provided data, which is typical for self-custodial wallets that do not hold user funds.
The Risk Disclaimer acknowledges potential regulatory changes that could impact operations.
Red Flags:
The uncertain regulatory status of crypto wallets globally could lead to future restrictions or compliance requirements.
Lack of explicit mention of AML/KYC policies, though this is standard for non-custodial wallets. Risk Level: Moderate. Operating in a crypto-friendly jurisdiction is positive, but regulatory uncertainty is a concern.

11. User Precautions ¶

To mitigate risks when using BlockWallet, users should:

Verify Authenticity:
- Download the wallet only from the official website (https://blockwallet.io/) or verified stores (e.g., Chrome Web Store).
- Check for the correct domain to avoid phishing sites or clones (e.g., pixer.io).
Secure Private Keys:
- Store seed phrases and private keys offline in a secure location (e.g., hardware wallet, encrypted USB).
- Never share private keys or seed phrases with anyone, and beware of phishing attempts.
Use Strong Security Practices:
- Enable two-factor authentication (2FA) on associated accounts (e.g., email used for recovery).
- Use a VPN or Tor to hide IP addresses when interacting with DApps, as recommended by BlockWallet.
- Clear browser cookies before using DApps to prevent tracking.
Monitor Token Allowances:
- Regularly revoke unnecessary token allowances to minimize DApp exploit risks.
Stay Informed:
- Follow official BlockWallet social media and GitHub for updates on security patches or new features.
- Be aware of regulatory changes in your jurisdiction that could affect wallet usage.
Backup and Test:
- Test wallet recovery with a small amount of funds to ensure seed phrases work correctly.
- Use hardware wallets (Ledger, Trezor) for added security.

12. Potential Brand Confusion ¶

Similar Names:
Block.io: A wallet hosting service with a different business model (custodial, API-focused).
Blockaid: A blockchain security platform focused on fraud detection, not a wallet.
Blockworks: A crypto media and events platform, unrelated to wallets.
Cloning Incident:
The cloning of blockwallet.io by pixer.io suggests deliberate imitation, which could mislead users into downloading fake software.
Generic Name:
“BlockWallet” is a generic term combining “blockchain” and “wallet,” making it susceptible to imitation by malicious actors creating similar-sounding domains or apps.
Red Flags:
Users must double-check the URL (https://blockwallet.io/) and extension source to avoid fake versions.
The lack of a highly distinctive brand name increases the risk of phishing or scam sites. Risk Level: Moderate to High. The cloning incident and generic name heighten the risk of brand confusion, requiring user vigilance.

13. Overall Risk Level and Recommendations ¶

Overall Risk Level: Moderate

Strengths:
Self-custodial model reduces counterparty risk.
Strong privacy and security features (Privacy Proxies, zk-SNARKs, phishing protection).
Open-source code, regular audits, and professional website enhance trust.
Positive user reviews and active development on GitHub.
Weaknesses:
Limited user feedback (small review sample size).
Regulatory uncertainty and third-party dependencies.
Cloning by pixer.io and potential brand confusion with similar names.
Incomplete WHOIS and IP/hosting data limits transparency. Recommendations:
For Users:
Follow the precautions listed above, especially verifying the official website and securing private keys.
Start with a small amount of funds to test the wallet before transferring significant assets.
Monitor official channels for security updates and be cautious of phishing attempts.
For Further Verification:
Conduct a WHOIS lookup via a service like ICANN or WhoisXML to confirm registration details.
Check the Chrome Web Store for user reviews and extension authenticity.
Investigate node provider reliability and DeFi integration security independently.

14. Sources ¶

The analysis is based on the provided web results and general knowledge of cryptocurrency wallets. Specific citations include:

Trustpilot reviews and company details.
BlockWallet website content and features.
Risk Disclaimer and regulatory concerns.
Cloning incident and Webflow hosting.
GitHub activity and open-source code.
Phishing and blockchain security risks.
Privacy features and user precautions.
Brand confusion with Block.io, Blockaid, Blockworks. If you need further details or specific checks (e.g., WHOIS lookup, IP analysis), please let me know, and I can guide you on how to perform them or deepen the analysis!