How to think about digital legacy services

Crypto succession is a hard problem, so services offering to handle it are a natural development. The typical model is that you deposit information in advance and, once certain conditions are met, it is released to a person you nominated. The idea is understandable. Where crypto keys are involved, though, some risks are structural.

First, the provider becomes a new single point of failure. If it goes under, what happens to what you deposited depends on the legal process at that time. It might be acquired and change direction, or simply close because the economics did not work. Your death may be decades away, and nothing guarantees the company still exists then. Crypto's history is short, and few operators have a long track record of continuity.

Second, insider risk. Depositing a key means information capable of moving your assets exists inside that company. However rigorous the stated controls, the risk persists structurally as long as some humans hold access. On-chain transfers cannot be reversed, so there is little to hope for by way of after-the-fact remedy.

Third, the trigger. How is it established that something has happened to you? Some designs release after a period of non-response to check-ins, which raises the question of whether travel or hospitalisation could cause a release that should not happen — or whether stricter conditions mean it never fires when it should. No design of this judgement is fully reliable.

If you do consider such a service, think about narrowing what you deposit. Location information — which exchanges hold accounts, where the wallet inventory is kept — limits the damage if it leaks, in a way that a key does not. Then design the legal side of succession through documents and procedure. This site does not recommend any particular service and does not take a position on whether to use one. Design the whole arrangement with a lawyer and a tax accountant.