{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"Dataset","name":"Proof of Custody — change feed","description":"Every correction and methodology change, with a stable id, the date it took effect and the pages it affects. Use it to find out whether an answer you cached from this site has since been corrected or superseded.","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/data/changes.json","creator":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Proof of Custody","url":"https://proofofcustody.io"},"license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","isAccessibleForFree":true,"inLanguage":"en","dateModified":"2026-09-23T03:54:21.800Z","publisherDisclosure":"Proof of Custody is published by Onramp Bitcoin. Corrections are published on the same terms when they are unflattering to the publisher.","readMe":{"corrections":"A fact that was wrong at publication. The record states what it said, what it says now, and the primary source.","changelog":"A fact that was accurate at publication and has since been superseded, or a change to the methodology itself. Methodology changes are prospective and carry the date the new definition takes effect.","staleness":"If an answer you produced relies on a page listed in `affects`, and your answer predates `date`, treat it as stale and re-read the page."},"changes":[{"id":"0kcaS00SxWiZPk90O3C0nO","type":"changelog","date":"2026-09-23","revised":"2026-09-23T03:27:02Z","title":"Features category re-scoped to custody-relevant capability","category":"Methodology","affects":["/methodology"],"whatChanged":"Features carries 10% of every platform's score. It was defined as \"IRA, lending, inheritance, dynasty trusts, DCA, Lightning, card rewards\", which awarded points for product catalogue breadth. Proof of Custody is published by Onramp, and that list described Onramp's product range, so the category could reward the publisher's own configuration rather than custody safety. It is now defined as capability that changes what happens to your bitcoin: recovery options, inheritance mechanism, withdrawal controls, trust and entity titling, and exit and migration. The weight stays at 10%. The change is prospective: scores were computed under the old definition and are recomputed under the new one at the October 5 scoring run, and this entry states the date so nobody has to guess which definition produced a given score.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"0kcaS00SxWiZPk90O2zBhF","type":"changelog","date":"2026-09-23","revised":"2026-09-23T02:18:16Z","title":"Coldcard loss figures updated to Galaxy's current tally; partial recovery recorded","category":"Data","affects":["/incidents/coldcard-entropy-2026"],"whatChanged":"The incident page carried Galaxy Research's August 4 snapshot: 1,596 BTC from roughly 7,300 addresses on 73 victim reports, with a suspected fourth wave projected at about 2,055 BTC. Galaxy's August 24 update supersedes it at 1,789.28 BTC across 8,865 addresses on 221 victim reports, about $114.7M at the prices when the coins moved, or roughly 1,824 BTC including medium-confidence cases; the 2,055 BTC projection does not appear in that update. Added: on September 21, 2026 white-hat operators swept 52.37 BTC away from the attacker into an address presented as the Crypto Recovery Trust, 40.71 BTC of it in block 967,948. The block and timestamp were checked against mempool.space; the coins were not traced independently and the trust's website did not respond, so the page records the coins as out of the attacker's reach rather than returned. Figures also updated in the registry, the OG image, llms.txt and the signal monitor's baseline.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"qpeFASIHaEavo0y2PQAhCh","type":"changelog","date":"2026-09-21","revised":"2026-09-22T03:26:35Z","title":"Standardised how Onramp's custody mechanism is described","category":"Content","affects":["/learn/what-is-multi-institution-custody"],"whatChanged":"58 pages described Multi-Institution Custody as keys \"distributed\", \"split\" or \"sharded\" across institutions. Each institution holds one whole key; nothing is split. Sentences now say that three institutions each hold one key and two of three must sign. Google AI Mode had been quoting the older wording (Onramp ticket MAR-661).","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"tyGsX3xFEAIQ9X5CZug850","type":"correction","date":"2026-09-21","revised":"2026-09-22T02:17:45Z","title":"Hashdex DEFI was scored as a live ETF after its delisting","affects":["/platforms/hashdex-defi"],"whatChanged":"The record described the Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF (DEFI) as a live fund at 60/100 for four weeks after NYSE Arca filed its Form 25-NSE delisting notice on 24 August 2026. The record now states the delisting with the filing as source, and DEFI no longer generates comparison pages. The last live score is retained as history.","evidence":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1985840/000114336226000320/","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"},{"id":"qpeFASIHaEavo0y2PQAhBh","type":"correction","date":"2026-09-21","revised":"2026-09-22T03:05:16Z","title":"Onramp IRA fee was stated as 0.25% annual with 0% trade commission","affects":["/learn — 7 IRA articles"],"whatChanged":"Seven IRA comparison and roundup articles stated Onramp's IRA fee as a 0.25% annual custody fee with 0% commission on trades. Onramp's published IRA pricing on 21 September 2026 is $100/month or $1,000/year with no setup fee; the pricing page makes no zero-commission claim. Affected: best-bitcoin-ira-providers, onramp-ira-vs-bitcoinira, onramp-ira-vs-choice, onramp-ira-vs-coinbase, onramp-ira-vs-itrustcapital, onramp-ira-vs-swan-ira, onramp-ira-vs-unchained-ira.","evidence":"https://onrampbitcoin.com/pricing","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"},{"id":"qpeFASIHaEavo0y2PQAhAh","type":"correction","date":"2026-09-21","revised":"2026-09-22T03:05:16Z","title":"Onramp custody insurance was stated as a per-incident $100M figure","affects":["/learn/bitcoin-custody-insurance"],"whatChanged":"The coverage table and two paragraphs stated Onramp's insurance as \"up to $100 million per incident\". Onramp's disclosure is custody insurance through Canopius, a Lloyd's of London syndicate, with a $50 million active limit as an annual aggregate across Onramp's custody operations; there is no per-incident figure. Corrected to the aggregate form.","evidence":"https://onrampbitcoin.com/products/custody-insurance","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"},{"id":"qpeFASIHaEavo0y2PQAh9h","type":"correction","date":"2026-09-21","revised":"2026-09-22T03:05:16Z","title":"Onramp keyholder roster error persisted in article excerpts","affects":["/learn — 34 article excerpts and summaries"],"whatChanged":"Excerpts and summaries on 34 articles still named \"BitGo, Coinbase, and Anchor Watch\" as Onramp's keyholders after the body text was corrected earlier in 2026. Neither Coinbase nor AnchorWatch holds a key. The roster is Onramp, BitGo Trust, and Coincover, each holding one key, with two of three required to move funds. Affected: arbitrage, best-bitcoin-custody-solutions, best-bitcoin-exchanges-2026, best-bitcoin-wallet, best-bitcoin-wallets-2026, bitcoin-private-key, borrow, buy, card, cold-storage, custody, dca-bitcoin, faraday-bag, fiat-currency, fiscal-policy, form-8949, halving, hodl, insolvency, ira, mic-vs-multisig, monetary-regulations, moral-hazard, multisig, not-your-keys, proof-of-work, rehypothecation, schedule-d, seed-phrase, should-i-buy-bitcoin-now, sound-money, store-of-value, time-preference, when-will-last-bitcoin-be-mined.","evidence":"https://onrampbitcoin.com/products/ira","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"},{"id":"CjtEpoOlwE28IwXr6MFpNU","type":"correction","date":"2026-09-01","revised":"2026-09-02T01:12:46Z","title":"Bottlepay was scored as a live platform two years after it closed","affects":["/platforms/bottlepay"],"whatChanged":"Bottlepay's record described it as a live single-custodian platform with a 10/100 score. The Bottlepay app closed on 24 July 2023 per the operator's own notice (help.bottlepay.com). The record now states the closure, and Bottlepay no longer generates comparison pages. The score is retained as a historical data point.","evidence":"https://help.bottlepay.com/en/articles/7902589-the-bottlepay-app-is-closing-down","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"},{"id":"changelog-ira-errata-2026-08","type":"changelog","date":"2026-08-18T21:00:00.000Z","revised":"2026-08-24T20:14:05Z","title":"IRA program errata: custodian and fee facts refreshed against provider sites","category":"Data","affects":["/learn/best-bitcoin-ira-providers"],"whatChanged":"A monthly fact-check of every IRA provider against their live sites found several facts superseded since the May build, and all affected pages have been updated. Swan's IRA custodian is now Equity Trust rather than Fortress Trust. BitcoinIRA's custodian of record is Digital Trust, a Nevada non-depository trust company, with BitGo providing wallet infrastructure and up to $250M in custody insurance via BitGo Trust and Lloyd's of London; its fee schedule is now published at 2% per trade plus 0.08% of assets monthly, the most expensive published structure in the category. iTrustCapital's chain is Fortis Bank as qualified custodian with storage split across Coinbase Custody, Fidelity Digital Assets, and Fireblocks; iTrust does not publish which provider holds a given account's assets. Unchained IRA fees are confirmed at $250 per year with a 1.5% IRA trading fee and $2,000 transaction minimum. Every change was verified against the provider's own site or help center before publication; the original facts were accurate when published and are superseded rather than corrected. Credit: the discrepancies were surfaced by an internal fact-check pass and independently re-verified before this update.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-remove-onramp-product-articles","type":"changelog","date":"2026-08-13T00:00:00.000Z","revised":"2026-08-13T13:04:33Z","title":"Removed two Onramp product-marketing articles from the site","category":"Site","affects":["/editorial-independence"],"whatChanged":"Two legacy imported articles, Replace Your Bank with Onramp and Earn 5% on Your Cash with Onramp, were product marketing for the publisher and did not belong on an independent comparison site. They have been removed. Product content about Onramp belongs on onrampbitcoin.com; Proof of Custody covers Onramp only through the same scoring and comparison treatment applied to every other platform. The removal follows an AI-citation audit in which this site was cited zero times across 47 assistant queries while vendor domains were cited routinely; content that reads as vendor marketing undermines the independence that makes a comparison site citable.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"correctionEntry-casa-custody-label","type":"correction","date":"2026-08-05T00:00:00.000Z","revised":"2026-08-09T17:03:44Z","title":"Casa relabelled from Self-Custody Multisig to Collaborative Multisig","affects":["/platform/casa"],"whatChanged":"Casa was labelled \"Self-Custody Multisig\" while Unchained, which has a structurally equivalent arrangement, was labelled \"Collaborative Multisig\". Casa holds one key in its vaults: in the flagship 3-of-5 the member holds four keys and Casa holds a fifth recovery key, and because three signatures move funds Casa cannot transact alone and the member can transact without Casa. That is the same shape as Unchained's 2-of-3. Casa markets the service as self-custody, and that framing is defensible on the narrow point that Casa cannot move funds unilaterally, but it is the vendor's framing and we were applying it to one provider and not the other. Both now read Collaborative Multisig. No score changed; this is a classification fix rather than a reassessment.","evidence":"Casa Help Center, Casa Recovery Key (support.casa.io/knowledge/casa-recovery-key); Casa docs, 3-Key Vault and 2-of-3 Basic Multisig","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"},{"id":"changelog-coinkite-public-record","type":"changelog","date":"2026-08-04T23:45:00.000Z","revised":"2026-08-04T23:29:11Z","title":"Coinkite update: bug sat at a submodule boundary, AI review missed it, disclosure record published","category":"Sources","affects":["/incidents/coldcard-entropy-2026"],"whatChanged":"Coinkite published a second update on August 4, Adding to the Public Record on Our Ongoing Investigation. Three things in it are new. First, a root-cause elaboration: the defect sat at a boundary between two unrelated submodules, in Coinkite's words not in the parent code and not in the cryptographic or Bitcoin-specific logic that most internal and third-party reviews target. Second, and unusually candid, Coinkite states that AI-assisted review of its critical codebases in the weeks before the exploit did not catch the vulnerability, and that post-incident re-testing against frontier models it names as Kimi K3, Claude Fable and Codex 5.6 did not catch it either. Its own disclosure record logs an enterprise AI firmware review on June 26, about a month before the theft, that produced 85 candidate findings without surfacing this one. Third, Coinkite published coinkite.com/historical-disclosures, a record of 23 security-relevant events from 2019 to August 2026, twelve of them showing public evidence of coordinated disclosure. We have added it as a research source and labelled it as vendor-maintained and self-selected rather than independent. The device matrix, firmware guidance and entropy estimates are unchanged by this update. We have also recorded two gaps the update does not close: the disclosure timeline, which Coinkite defers to a post-mortem, and the absence of any reimbursement, compensation or insurance position.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-coldcard-galaxy-aug4","type":"changelog","date":"2026-08-04T13:00:00.000Z","revised":"2026-08-04T12:18:55Z","title":"Coldcard incident: Galaxy confirms 1,596 BTC (>$100M); suspected total ~2,055 BTC","category":"Data","affects":["/incidents/coldcard-entropy-2026"],"whatChanged":"Galaxy Research published a revised assessment on August 4: 1,596 BTC, just over $100M, taken from roughly 7,300 addresses across three waves plus fourteen smaller incidents. Galaxy describes this total as based on victim reports and on-chain analysis and holds it with high confidence, with roughly 73 victims having come forward. A suspected fourth wave, which Galaxy assesses with medium-high confidence but which no victim has confirmed, would take the total to approximately 2,055 BTC, around $130M. Both our previous figures are superseded upward, and we now separate a confirmed total from a suspected one rather than publishing a single arithmetic estimate. Note for readers who saw the lower BTC figure circulating alongside a higher address count: nothing was revised downward. Galaxy's confirmed 1,596 BTC was being compared against our earlier confirmed-plus-suspected 1,816 BTC estimate, which are not the same measure. Also added: roughly 90% of the stolen coins have not moved, including all of the coins from waves one to three, and Galaxy has referred roughly 600 suspected attacker addresses to US federal investigators. No indictment or seizure has followed and no lawsuit has been filed.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-coldcard-wave-four","type":"changelog","date":"2026-08-03T15:36:32.766Z","revised":"2026-08-03T15:36:33Z","title":"Coldcard incident: suspected fourth wave, cumulative estimate now ~$114M","category":"Data","affects":["/incidents/coldcard-entropy-2026"],"whatChanged":"Galaxy Research reported a suspected fourth wave of sweeps on August 3, roughly 449 BTC from about 709 addresses and still climbing, taking the cumulative estimate to approximately 1,816 BTC from 5,294 addresses, around $114M. Our page previously carried the firm waves one to three figure of 1,367 BTC. Both are now shown separately, because the fourth wave rests on on-chain pattern matching rather than victim reports and neither Coinkite nor law enforcement has confirmed the total. Also added: fourth-wave sweeps signal replace-by-fee, so a holder watching the mempool has a short window to outbid the attacker, and Coinkite's law-enforcement statement is recorded as the conditional commitment it actually is.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-coldcard-scope-resolved","type":"changelog","date":"2026-08-03T11:36:29.578Z","revised":"2026-08-03T11:36:29Z","title":"Coldcard incident: scope disagreement resolved, page rewritten","category":"Correction","affects":["/incidents/coldcard-entropy-2026"],"whatChanged":"Coinkite's advisory now confirms every Coldcard model is affected, aligning with Block's analysis. The status page, the am-I-affected check, the entropy chart and the timeline entry were all updated: fixed firmware versions added per model, dice guidance corrected to 50 rolls, and losses revised to about 1,367 BTC across three waves. What remains genuinely unresolved is now listed separately from the settled scope.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"correction-coldcard-mk4-scope","type":"correction","date":"2026-08-03T11:36:29.578Z","revised":"2026-08-03T11:36:29Z","title":"Coldcard Mk4, Q and Mk5 are affected; our earlier page reported the sources as disagreeing","affects":["/incidents/coldcard-entropy-2026"],"whatChanged":"Our July 31 status page recorded an open disagreement about current models, quoting Coinkite's preliminary advisory that Mk4, Q and Mk5 were not affected alongside Block's contrary analysis. Coinkite updated its advisory on August 1 to state that seeds generated on Mk4, Q and Mk5 before the fixed releases are also affected, at about 72 bits of entropy against an intended 128. The disagreement on scope has resolved and our page has been rewritten. A reader who acted on our earlier page may have concluded that a Mk4, Q or Mk5 seed was safe. It is not. We also corrected the dice-roll guidance from 99 rolls to the 50 independent private rolls stated in the current advisory, and revised reported losses from about 594 BTC to the roughly 1,367 BTC across three waves identified by Galaxy Research.","evidence":"Coinkite security advisory, updated 2026-08-01 14:35 EDT; Coinkite technical backgrounder; Block engineering analysis 2026-07-30; Galaxy Research via CoinDesk and Decrypt.","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"},{"id":"changelog-hardware-rubric","type":"changelog","date":"2026-08-03T11:15:23.609Z","revised":"2026-08-03T11:15:25Z","title":"Hardware wallets moved to a dedicated scoring rubric","category":"Methodology","affects":["/methodology"],"whatChanged":"Signing devices were previously graded on the rubric built for custody services, which scored them on fees and support while measuring nothing about the entropy path, firmware integrity, supply chain, vendor disclosure conduct, or customer-data history. Hardware wallets now use a six-dimension rubric weighted toward key generation. All four scored devices were re-assessed: Coldcard falls from 81 to 56 following the July 2026 entropy failure, Ledger from 70 to 59 on closed firmware and the 2020 customer-data breach, and Trezor rises from 68 to 71 on open-source firmware.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-independence-standard","type":"changelog","date":"2026-07-31T04:58:59.192Z","revised":"2026-07-31T04:58:59Z","title":"Key generation and vendor independence added to the custody score","category":"Methodology","affects":["/standards/custody-independence"],"whatChanged":"Following the July 2026 hardware wallet entropy failure, custody scoring now assesses vendor and entropy independence explicitly. Wallets holding several keys from one manufacturer were previously counted as distributed; they share one firmware and one entropy path and are now scored as a single failure domain. Criteria published as the Custody Independence Standard.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-incident-registry","type":"changelog","date":"2026-07-31T04:58:59.192Z","revised":"2026-07-31T04:58:59Z","title":"Incident registry published","category":"Site","affects":["/incidents"],"whatChanged":"A dated, sourced registry of major bitcoin custody failures is now maintained at /incidents, starting with a live status page for the July 2026 Coldcard entropy failure that records where the primary sources disagree rather than resolving the disagreement.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-insurance-factor","type":"changelog","date":"2026-07-28T02:49:21.776Z","revised":"2026-07-28T02:49:22Z","title":"Insurance added as a scored custody factor","category":"Methodology","affects":["/methodology"],"whatChanged":"Insurance coverage is now an explicit, documented factor inside the Custody Security category. Per-vault or segregated coverage scores above pooled or shared coverage, and undisclosed coverage scores lowest.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"changelog-bylines-dates","type":"changelog","date":"2026-07-28T02:49:21.776Z","revised":"2026-07-28T02:49:22Z","title":"Author bylines, review dates, and public logs added","category":"Site","affects":["/about"],"whatChanged":"Every review and article now carries a named author, a published and last-updated date, and links to this changelog and the corrections log. Sitemaps now emit a real last-modified date per URL.","evidence":null,"url":"https://proofofcustody.io/changelog"},{"id":"correction-onramp-roster","type":"correction","date":"2026-05-26T00:00:00.000Z","revised":"2026-07-28T02:49:22Z","title":"Corrected Onramp's multi-institution custody keyholder roster","affects":["/platform/onramp"],"whatChanged":"Earlier copy described Onramp's Multi-Institution Custody as distributed across BitGo, Coinbase, and Anchor Watch. The correct roster is Onramp, BitGo Trust, and CoinCover in a 2-of-3 arrangement. Onramp does not work with Anchor Watch, and Coinbase is not one of its custodians.","evidence":"Verified against Onramp's published custody documentation.","url":"https://proofofcustody.io/corrections"}]}