COLDCARD RNG incident the public record, collected and explained
Informational only, and this site never asks for your seed words. details

Informational only. This is an open source collection of what others have published about the incident, together with an explanation of it. It is not financial, security or legal advice, and not a substitute for professional advice about your own situation. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or speaking for Coinkite. Material is attributed and quoted as published; where sources disagree their scenarios are kept separate with their assumptions rather than reconciled into one answer. Everything is meant to be checked against the linked evidence rather than taken on trust. Act on your own judgement about a particular situation. Editorial standards and corrections.

Do not disclose recovery material to a website, form, message or support account. This site never asks for it, and contributions containing recovery words or private keys are not accepted.

Disclosure-channel coverage across reviewed repos

callebtc-2085418280253038697

https://x.com/callebtc/status/2085418280253038697

Captured screenshot of the post by @callebtc, posted 6 Aug 2026, 17:30 UTC
@callebtc posted captured full-size capture → original post →
Author
@callebtc
Organisation
independent
Evidence role
social statement
Posted
Capture status
capture held

A method note in the Bitcoin Red Team thread whose parent, held at callebtc-2085418268689391792, reports 425 projects scanned and 1,029 high and critical findings. It says the campaign's biggest bottleneck is not finding bugs but reaching maintainers: of 426 reviewed projects only 19.5 percent, 83 projects, publish a SECURITY.md, and only 13.1 percent, 56 projects, have an extractable security email, with 28 routing through GitHub advisories and 408 repositories resolved. The attached chart is the source of those figures, and the ask is that maintainers leave an email address in their repositories. Held because it quantifies a coordination problem the incident exposed, and because it bears directly on the responsible-disclosure argument recorded elsewhere in this register. Interest: calle leads the campaign whose reporting volume was itself being criticised at the time. The percentages are the campaign's own measurements and are not verified here.

This post is registered as evidence and has a locally held capture. The original remains the canonical publication.

How to check this yourself

Compare the screenshot or a quotation against the original while it is available.