CustodyStress
Archive › Documentation absent
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01148

The minimum threshold for the specific Shamir scheme used was 2-of-3.

Blocked
Case description
A 2023 case involved a Bitcoin holder who had set up a complex custody arrangement using Shamir's Secret Sharing across three trusted contacts in 2020. By 2023, one contact had moved countries and was unreachable, and a second had died. Only one of the three fragments remained accessible. The minimum threshold for the specific Shamir scheme used was 2-of-3. With only one fragment available, the entire arrangement was unrecoverable. The case illustrated how Shamir's Secret Sharing—designed to prevent single points of failure—created a different failure mode when the fragment holders themselves were unavailable.
Custody context
Stress conditionDocumentation absent
Custody systemHardware wallet (single key)
OutcomeBlocked
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2023
CountryInternational
Structural dependencies observed
Single point of failure
What this illustrates
There was only one way in. When that path was gone, so was access. Access was not recoverable.
Outcome interpretation
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Source
Privately Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving documentation absent
193 cases involve documentation absent 274 cases involve hardware wallet (single key) View archive statistics →
This archive documents observed custody survivability failures. It does not attempt to document all Bitcoin losses or security incidents. Submit a case
← All cases
Framework references
Terms guide
Survives
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Constrained
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Blocked
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Indeterminate
There was not enough information to determine the outcome.
Single-person knowledge
Recovery depended on information or capability held by one individual who was unavailable.
Institutional dependence
Recovery depended on a third-party institution or service that was inaccessible or uncooperative.
Documentation gap
Recovery depended on instructions that were missing, incomplete, or unclear.
Authority mismatch
The person with legal authority to act did not have operational access, or vice versa.
Original text
Rate this translation
Your feedback will be used to help improve Google Translate