Web3 Security Evolution: Tools for Humanity's Adrian Ludwig Calls for Industry-Wide Adaptation
A New Security Mandate for a Maturing Web3 Ecosystem
The foundational promise of "your keys, your coins" has been a cornerstone of the cryptocurrency ethos since Bitcoin's inception. However, this principle carries a latent assumption that Tools for Humanity’s Adrian Ludwig argues the industry must urgently move beyond: the idea that security problems are predominantly the holder’s responsibility. In an industry now managing trillions of dollars and involving millions of users, this mindset is no longer tenable. The experimental phase of crypto is over, and with its maturation comes a pressing need for an evolved approach to security—one where the burden shifts from the user to the industry's designers and builders. As security threats grow in sophistication, from AI-powered phishing to violent physical assaults, Ludwig contends that predictable security failures must be treated as critical feedback, compelling a fundamental redesign of systems for real-world risks.
The Expanding Attack Surface: From Digital Wallets to Physical Threats
The design space for cryptocurrency has expanded exponentially since Bitcoin was created over 15 years ago. What began as a decentralized monetary system has evolved into a complex ecosystem of apps, protocols, exchanges, stablecoins, and dozens of token standards. This interconnectivity has created a trillion-dollar economy, but it has also multiplied the security risks and raised the stakes immeasurably.
While self-custody remains a vital component of crypto's value proposition, Ludwig emphasizes that Web3 designers can no longer place the majority of the security burden on users. For crypto to succeed as a mainstream technology, the industry must develop solutions that counter real-world threats—including social engineering, human error, and physical coercion—without sacrificing core values like anonymity and pseudonymity. The challenge is no longer just about protecting private keys from digital theft; it's about designing systems resilient to the full spectrum of human vulnerability.
What the Numbers Tell Us: A Sobering Reality Check
Decades of personal computing have provided ample data on user behavior, and the conclusions are unambiguous: human cyber hygiene is imperfect. While initiatives like Cybersecurity Awareness Month provide valuable education, threats like phishing, malicious QR codes, and malware remain persistently effective. These attack vectors are not disappearing; they are evolving at a pace that often outstrips defensive measures.
The data paints a stark picture. According to figures compiled by CoinLaw, crypto phishing attacks saw a 40% increase in early 2025 alone, resulting in user losses valued at $410 million. Compounding this issue is the rise of AI-powered deepfakes, which increased by over 450% between mid-2024 and mid-2025, according to CoinLaw’s data.
Perhaps most alarming is the documented uptick in violent, physical attacks. Organized crime groups are increasingly targeting high-net-worth individuals, using physical coercion to extract credentials. Blockchain tracking company Chainalysis reported over 30 documented "wrench attacks" in 2024, with 2025 on pace to double that number. These statistics underscore a critical point: security breaches are not anomalies. They are predictable events that must be anticipated and designed against.
Shifting the Paradigm: Security as a Design Feedback Loop
The core of Ludwig's argument is a fundamental shift in perspective: security issues should be treated as feedback for Web3 designers, not merely as user errors. When a password is stolen or funds are phished, the instinctive response might be to blame the user for falling for a scam. While individual vigilance is important, systemic failures require systemic solutions. If millions of such incidents occur annually across a user base, it is a clear indication that the underlying system is not designed for how actual people behave.
This philosophy mirrors approaches in other engineering disciplines. We do not shrug at earthquakes in seismically active regions like San Francisco or Japan; we build earthquake-resistant structures. The same logical framework must be applied to crypto security. Every breach reveals a weakness in design, providing invaluable data on how to build more resilient systems. The goal is to create products that protect users automatically, without relying on their constant, flawless vigilance.
Learning from Web2: Incorporating Proven Security Layers
A significant part of the solution lies in looking beyond the Web3 bubble and incorporating successful security models from the broader internet. Consider the problem of authentication. While using a cryptographic key for access is powerful, it does not inherently confirm that the person using the key is its legitimate owner.
The traditional web long ago adopted additional layers to address this gap. Multifactor authentication (MFA), behavioral signal analysis, and more recent innovations like proof-of-human techniques are designed to protect people automatically. These methods add frictionless security checks that operate in the background, mitigating risk without placing the entire onus on the user. Crypto can and should follow this lead, integrating these proven security layers while preserving its decentralized ethos.
Innovation at the Wallet Level: Usability Meets Security
The wallet experience has long been a bottleneck for mainstream crypto adoption, with security considerations often creating a cumbersome user interface. The good news is that tangible progress is being made. Innovations such as split wallets with different keys for varying transaction types, delegation features that allow for limited third-party access, and multi-wallet account structures are significantly improving the landscape.
These advancements represent a crucial step in balancing the often-competing demands of usability and robust security. By abstracting away complexity without compromising on self-sovereignty, modern wallet designs are demonstrating that user-friendly experiences and strong security are not mutually exclusive. This ongoing evolution at the wallet level is a practical manifestation of the industry-wide adaptation Ludwig advocates for.
Confronting Physical Reality: Designing for Coercion and Abuse
The security conversation must extend beyond digital threats to encompass physical reality. Cryptocurrency executives and high-net-worth holders have been targeted in a rash of physical assaults where thieves seek access not through brute-force decryption but through plain old brute force.
If systems are designed without incorporating the possibility of physical abuse, then designers are failing their users. This new attack vector necessitates features that can mitigate coercion, such as time-delayed transactions for large withdrawals or duress codes that provide access to a decoy wallet. Acknowledging and designing for these grim possibilities is an essential part of building a secure ecosystem for all participants.
Conclusion: Building for Real People in a Trillion-Dollar Era
Crypto’s rugged individualist ethos was fitting for its experimental beginnings. However, now that trillions of dollars in assets and human livelihoods are at stake, the industry must pivot toward systems engineered for real-world risks rather than idealized early adopters.
There are no silver bullets. Cryptographic keys will remain vulnerable to sophisticated phishing, biometrics can make holders targets for physical attacks, and humans will continue to be imperfect. The path forward requires a holistic approach that treats security as an integral component of product design from the outset.
As we advance, the industry's success will be measured by its ability to strengthen lives while protecting against human weaknesses. The responsibility is collective. Security is no longer solely a user problem; it is an industry-wide imperative demanding adaptation, innovation, and an unwavering commitment to building for real people.
This analysis is based on the commentary from Tools for Humanity’s Adrian Ludwig. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of CoinDesk, Inc. or its owners and affiliates.