Company Disappearance as a Custody Interpretation Problem
Device Manufacturer Disappearance and Recovery
This memo is published by CustodyStress, an independent Bitcoin custody stress test that produces reference documents for individuals, families, and professionals.
Device Functioning, Company Uncertain
A person owns a hardware wallet. The device works. The bitcoin is accessible. Then the person thinks: what if the hardware wallet company disappears? The company might fail, be absorbed, or simply cease operations. The person bought a product from this company. They wonder what happens if the company is no longer there.
This analysis covers how fears of company disappearance surface questions about custody independence. The fear is not specific to any one brand. It applies to any hardware wallet from any company. The question reveals uncertainty about where custody actually resides: in the company's ongoing existence, in the device, or in something else entirely.
Device Functioning, Company Uncertain
The hardware wallet functions today. It powers on, connects to software, signs transactions, and does what hardware wallets do. The device's current function is not in question. What is in question is the future.
The company's future is inherently uncertain. Companies come and go. The hardware wallet industry has seen vendors emerge and disappear. The person's specific vendor may be stable today but uncertain tomorrow. Business conditions change.
The person cannot know the company's future. They can observe the present: the device works, the company exists. They cannot observe the future: whether the company will exist in five years, ten years, or longer. The uncertainty about the company creates uncertainty about custody.
This uncertainty is transferred from the company to the bitcoin. The person worries about the company, but the underlying worry is about the bitcoin. If the company disappears, what happens to the bitcoin? The company's uncertain future feels like it threatens the bitcoin's accessibility.
Custody Tied to Brand Survival
The fear of company disappearance reveals an implicit assumption: that custody is tied to the brand's survival. If the company survives, custody is secure. If the company fails, custody is threatened. The brand becomes a pillar that custody rests on.
This assumption makes sense for many products. A car from a bankrupt company becomes harder to service. Software from a defunct company stops receiving updates. Products often depend on their makers for ongoing viability. The person extends this logic to their hardware wallet.
The assumption creates anxiety because companies are fragile. Even successful companies can fail. Even dominant market positions can erode. If custody depends on company survival, then custody depends on something uncertain and outside the person's control.
The anxiety is proportional to the perceived importance of the company. The more essential the company seems to the custody arrangement, the more threatening its potential disappearance becomes. The person's mental model of what the company provides determines how much they fear its absence.
Independence Assumptions Unclear
The person may not have a clear model of what depends on the company and what is independent. The hardware wallet experience combines company-dependent and company-independent elements. Without understanding which is which, everything feels dependent.
Company-dependent elements include the specific device, the companion software, the firmware updates, and the customer support. These are services and products the company provides. If the company disappears, these specific implementations are affected.
Company-independent elements include the private keys, the seed phrase, and the bitcoin itself. These exist regardless of any company. The keys are mathematical objects. The seed phrase is a standardized backup format. The bitcoin lives on the blockchain. None of these require any specific company to exist.
The independence of the keys from the company is the crucial point. The hardware wallet is a tool for managing keys. The keys are not the property of the tool maker. If the tool maker disappears, the keys remain. They can be used with other tools.
Scenarios That Trigger the Question
A person learns that a hardware wallet company from years past no longer exists. The historical example demonstrates that hardware wallet companies can fail. They wonder if their own hardware wallet company could follow the same path.
A person considers how long they plan to hold their bitcoin. The holding period stretches into the indefinite future. Companies rarely last indefinitely. The mismatch between holding period and company lifespan prompts concern.
A person experiences frustration with their hardware wallet company. Poor support, controversial decisions, or technical problems shake their confidence. If the company is unreliable now, what happens when they might be needed later? What happens if they disappear?
A person notices they cannot use their hardware wallet without the company's software. The software connects to company servers or requires company infrastructure. The visible dependency raises questions about invisible dependencies.
What Company Disappearance Would Mean
If a hardware wallet company disappeared, certain things would happen. The company's software would stop being updated. Eventually, compatibility issues might arise with operating systems or blockchain changes. The software might become unusable over time.
The hardware devices would still function as long as they physically work. The electronics do not stop working because the company stops existing. But devices eventually fail, and replacement devices would not be available from the same vendor.
Support and documentation would become unavailable from the company. Questions would have no official answers. Problems would have no official support channel. The person would be on their own with the product they have.
None of this would directly affect the bitcoin or the keys. The bitcoin does not know what company made the hardware wallet. The keys do not depend on the company's existence. The bitcoin remains at the same addresses, controlled by the same keys, regardless of what happens to the company.
Dependency Boundaries
Understanding dependency boundaries helps resolve the anxiety. The boundaries separate what depends on the company from what does not.
Inside the dependency boundary: the specific device, the specific software, the specific user experience. These are tied to the company. If the company disappears, these specific implementations are affected. The person might need to migrate to different tools.
Outside the dependency boundary: the private keys, the seed phrase backup, the bitcoin on the blockchain. These are not tied to any company. They use open standards that work across vendors. The seed phrase can restore keys to many different wallets from many different companies.
The seed phrase is the bridge across the dependency boundary. It captures the keys in a form that is not company-specific. As long as the person has their seed phrase, they can access their bitcoin even if their hardware wallet company disappears. The seed phrase provides independence.
The Role of Standards
Hardware wallets use industry standards for key generation and backup. These standards are not owned by any single company. They exist as shared protocols that many different wallets implement. This standardization is what enables independence from any specific vendor.
The seed phrase format is one such standard. A seed phrase from one hardware wallet can typically be imported into other hardware wallets or software wallets. The words encode the keys in a vendor-neutral way.
Derivation paths and address formats are also standardized. The way keys become addresses follows protocols that any compatible wallet can implement. The bitcoin does not care which wallet generated the address as long as the standard was followed.
These standards mean that company disappearance is an inconvenience, not a catastrophe. The person loses their specific tool. They do not lose access to their keys. They can use other tools that follow the same standards. The standards provide the true foundation of custody, not the company.
Assessment
Fears of hardware wallet company disappearance surface questions about custody independence. The fear reveals uncertainty about what depends on the company and what is independent. Without clear dependency boundaries, company survival feels essential to custody.
Company-dependent elements include the specific device, software, and support. These would be affected if the company disappeared. Company-independent elements include the private keys, seed phrase, and bitcoin itself. These exist regardless of any company.
Industry standards enable independence from specific vendors. The seed phrase captures keys in a vendor-neutral format. If a hardware wallet company disappears, the seed phrase can restore access using other compatible wallets. The true foundation of custody is the keys and the standards, not the company.
System Context
Concentration Anxiety Without a Threshold
For anyone who holds Bitcoin — on an exchange, in a wallet, through a service, or in self-custody — and wants to know what happens to it if something happens to them.
Start Bitcoin Custody Stress Test$179 · 12-month access · Unlimited assessments
A structured, scenario-based diagnostic that produces reference documents for your spouse, executor, or attorney — no accounts connected, no keys shared.
Sample what the assessment produces