Chapter 2 – Security: Keeping Your Assets Safe in Any Situation

Assets stay under owner control until strict on-chain conditions allow execution.

Alice always took crypto security seriously. She protected her wallets, maintained backups, and followed best practices — yet she remained uncertain about what would happen if she could no longer act herself:

• Multisig wallets or MPC: Coordination failure is a real risk. If one key is lost or compromised, assets may be locked or exposed. Relying on multiple signers also introduces human conflict and availability risks.

• Mnemonic sharing: Simple, but brittle. A single leaked or lost fragment can lead to immediate and irreversible loss.

• Traditional legal custody (lawyers, notaries, trust companies): Handing over backups or keys to intermediaries creates new attack surfaces. Documents can be copied, lost, or misused, and legal processes cannot execute on-chain actions.

That is why Alice chose CryptoLegacy.

With CryptoLegacy, Alice retained full control while she was active. Her assets stayed in her own wallets and were never deposited into third-party contracts. The system operated as a predefined state machine: as long as Alice remained active, no one else could initiate transfers or move assets.

She designated Guardians in advance — family members, friends, or advisors — who could act only within strict protocol-defined limits. No single Guardian could trigger execution alone. A predefined threshold of confirmations was required, followed by a mandatory challenge period before any transfer became possible.

Guardians had no direct access to funds and no visibility into balances. Even if a Guardian’s account were compromised, it could not result in immediate execution. Their role was limited to contributing a confirmation toward a state transition, not granting control.

Beneficiaries were also constrained by design. Even if a beneficiary account were compromised, assets could not be withdrawn all at once. Claims were only possible after the system entered the distribution state and followed Alice’s predefined schedule, releasing assets gradually.

When Alice suffered a serious accident and remained unconscious for weeks, uncertainty spread among those around her. Despite this, her assets remained inaccessible to unauthorized action. No one could bypass thresholds, skip the challenge period, or accelerate execution. Only after the required confirmations and time-based checks were satisfied did the system transition states and allow predefined distribution rules to execute.

Alice later recovered. Using the predefined recovery mechanism, she regained control over the remaining contract-held assets. Transfers that had already occurred were final, but no additional assets were exposed or moved prematurely.

CryptoLegacy did not eliminate risk. It reduced critical failure modes by design:

• Assets remained under owner control until thresholds and time-based conditions were met.

• Execution required multiple confirmations, not a single compromised actor.

• Challenge periods prevented rushed or mistaken execution.

• Recovery applied only to remaining assets, without rewriting history.

CryptoLegacy gave Alice something other approaches could not: a security model that continues to function correctly even when the owner cannot act.

Your keys. Your crypto. Your security.