The kidnapping of David Balland and his companion this week, as well as the upsurge in assaults targeting key figures in the crypto ecosystem, have highlighted the dangers faced by major holders. These events highlight the crucial importance of personal and asset security for the fortunes of the sector.
For Romain Chilly, a lawyer specialising in new technology and digital asset law at ORWL, "increased vigilance, both in technical and behavioural terms, is essential when you are notoriously known as a holder of digital assets".
But this week's case mainly concerns well-known figures in the crypto ecosystem, it requires a broader reflection for all those who hold significant crypto assets.
>> Read also - Nicolas Bacca: "We have invented a unique organisational model for intervening in cryptocurrency ransomware"
Prevention through control of personal data Managing private data accessible online remains an often overlooked aspect of security for cryptocurrency holders. According to Romain Chilly, "the problem often stems from the volume of personal information publicly available. Many people don't realise that a simple e-mail address or telephone number can be exploited for malicious purposes."
To reduce these risks, several concrete actions can be put in place:
Active monitoring of public data Specialised services search for and delete personal information circulated on the Internet, such as names, addresses or telephone numbers. They regularly analyse public databases, social networks and even the dark web. "They scrutinise everything that comes out about me, from my company to the people I hire, and eliminate anything that could pose a problem," explains a media entrepreneur on condition of anonymity.
Applications to the commercial courts enable directors to limit the exposure of their personal addresses in public documents. The right to be forgotten also offers the possibility of having harmful content removed from search engines. "You can also assert your rights with websites to request the deletion of data disseminated without your consent," says Romain Chilly.
Cleaning up social networks Social platforms are a major source of information that can be exploited by criminals. "Too many people share their movements, their lifestyle or even photos of their homes without a second thought", warns Romain Chilly. In-depth analysis of accounts, followed by rigorous sorting of publications and adjustment of privacy settings, is proving crucial.
For some, this vigilance has become a regular collective practice. "Every month, we examine a few key profiles in our ecosystem to check whether their addresses, personal information or privacy loopholes are accessible", says a well-known entrepreneur.
The specific case of influencers and exposed personalities A popular influencer, regrets having exposed his earnings on social networks: "I made the mistake of sharing sensitive information. This experience has taught me to stop sharing anything publicly, especially about my earnings."
These highly exposed personalities will now have to be more discreet about their financial success. This is a delicate balance to strike, as the credibility of many crypto influencers is partly based on demonstrating their financial success.
In addition, it may be useful to raise awareness among those close to them (family, friends, associates, etc.) to adopt the same behaviour to avoid becoming an indirect target.
Technical solutions to be favoured: multisignature, time lock, banks, etc. Digital discretion alone is not enough. Technical measures must complement it to reduce vulnerabilities.
Joël-Alexis Bialkiewicz, a partner at Banque Delubac offering crypto services, highlights the limitations of hardware wallets as the only means of protection. "Holding large sums in a hardware wallet, whether Ledger or Trezor, is not very prudent. They can be part of a security scheme, but they are not sufficient in themselves. If someone holds you up at gunpoint, you'll end up giving your codes away."
Among the most recommended tools is the use of multi-signature wallets (Electrum, Cobo, Safe, etc.). These wallets require several electronic signatures to validate a transaction. "The ideal is to set up at least three validators, including a trusted third party from outside your close circle, such as a notary or specialist company," explains lawyer Romain Chilly.
Systems such as time locks and spending limits also enhance security. A time lock imposes a delay (several days, for example) before a major transaction can be finalised, leaving time to intervene in the event of suspicious behaviour. In addition, limiting the daily or weekly amount of transactions reduces potential losses in the event of theft.
Joël-Alexis Bialkiewiczk agrees, but warns that these solutions must be well thought through. "A multisig is perfect, but beware: if your keys are all at home or with friends, it's no use. A thief will make you say where they are, then go and get the keys back one by one. On the other hand, storing pieces of key in different banks, ideally in different countries, means that you have to travel from one continent to another to access the funds, but makes attacks virtually impossible. If you opt to self-holder your cryptos, you have to adopt almost paranoid processes."
For him, solutions offering security comparable to traditional money transfers represent an optimal compromise. "If you entrust us with a wallet and try to transfer half of your funds to an unknown address, we will naturally block the transaction, exactly as with euros," he points out.
Paradoxically, banks thus appear to be a serious option for securing cryptocurrencies. "I have nothing against self-hoarding," he adds, "like all early crypto users I'm in favour of the concept, but as soon as you start to have a significant crypto holdings I don't think the hardware wallet is enough. It's like with money in general, if you have a lot of it the safest thing is still to put it in a bank."
