PLATFORM REVIEW9:44 · Yassine Geek

Bravoos - The Next Generation of wallets made for an intuitive and safe start in crypto! #1

Braavos part one: Starknet, the activity dashboard and a wallet built around application access

Yassine Geeks first Braavos video, published on 13 February 2024, introduces the wallet through the larger Starknet ecosystem. It explains the layer-two idea, shows desktop and mobile access, points to Starknet Pro Score and protocol discovery, and discusses a development partnership. The recording also uses strongly optimistic language about airdrops and future adoption. This article keeps that historical enthusiasm separate from guaranteed rewards. It follows what the presenter actually discusses, adds a primary-source clarification where a technical phrase could mislead, and identifies the information that a product tour leaves unresolved. The Pro Score guide is useful as a dated description of an activity metric, not as a contract promising tokens. The partnership announcement describes areas of planned collaboration, not proof that every proposed improvement was already delivered in the video. No wallet transaction or personal reward is claimed here. The original Braavos homepage address remains the exact link supplied in the video description, allowing readers to identify the intended product while checking current documentation for their own account configuration.

The opening network explanation: scaling and verification

Watch this chapter ↗ 00:51

At around 00:51 the presenter asks what Starknet is and describes a second-layer solution for Ethereum. He talks about increasing application throughput, moving computation away from the main chain and retaining an Ethereum-linked security foundation. That is the network context for the wallet review. Braavos is not presented as an exchange operating in isolation; it is an interface for accounts and applications on a particular blockchain ecosystem. Understanding that context helps a reader distinguish the wallet software from the network processing the transactions.

The technical explanation later associates zero-knowledge proofs with privacy and integrity. This needs a narrow clarification. Starknets primary introduction describes a validity rollup using STARK proofs for verifiable computation, and its FAQ separates that mechanism from applications that provide privacy. A validity proof can establish that a state transition followed the rules without automatically hiding all user activity. This article therefore does not repeat a universal privacy guarantee from the videos broad wording. Nor does it turn a later privacy-related development into a feature that the 2024 recording demonstrated.

The practical distinction is between doing the work and checking that the work was valid. Scaling aims to make more activity feasible, while proof verification supports trust in the recorded result. Neither alone tells a customer the exact cost or duration of a specific wallet action. The presenter gives a conceptual introduction rather than measured network benchmarks. A reader should use it to understand why the wallet can support applications on Starknet, then inspect the current fee and transaction status in the actual interface. This makes the network section useful without inventing speed figures or treating a cryptographic term as a blanket promise of confidentiality.

What the wallet is shown as doing

Watch this chapter ↗ 02:11

At approximately 02:11 the presenter shows the official Braavos website. Around 02:24 he discusses availability on computers and phones, naming iOS, Android and browser extensions such as Chrome and Firefox. He then mentions storing crypto, buying or selling and managing NFTs. These are functions described during the tour. The recording does not demonstrate every supported asset, complete a purchase or test compatibility across each device. Its value is to introduce the wallet as a user interface with several kinds of activity, rather than only a place to display one token balance.

Different functions imply different requests. Viewing a balance is not a transfer; connecting to an application is not a swap; managing an NFT can involve an approval or a transaction. A beginner can make a small action map before using funds: which screen shows assets, which shows activity, where the account is selected and where signing occurs. This is explanatory context for the video, not a report of a test performed by the author. It helps preserve the distinction between seeing a feature advertised and understanding the request the feature eventually produces.

Self-custody also deserves concrete meaning. The current Braavos security page describes user control of funds and additional signing options. That does not mean the user can ignore recovery or rely on ordinary customer-service password resets. The account configuration and recovery instructions need to be understood together. The original homepage route identifies the wallet product, but a reader still needs current documentation for the device and account type chosen. The installation portion of this video supplies a starting map, while the operational plan must match the actual wallet in use.

The activity dashboard: why a score can organise exploration

Watch this chapter ↗ 03:10

At around 03:10 the presenter turns to Starknet Pro Score, describing an overview of activity that makes interacting with several protocols easier to organise. He returns to the same idea near 04:58 and emphasises access from both desktop and mobile. The feature addresses a real interface problem: on-chain activity can be scattered across applications, while a wallet user wants to see it in one place. A dashboard can help someone understand what they have done without remembering every transaction manually. The video does not, however, demonstrate that the score predicts investment success.

The dated official guide describes three dimensions: variety of protocol interaction, engagement and activity over time. It presents an average of components labelled O, E and T, with a warning that the formula can change. Those limited details explain the sort of metric under discussion. They are not a current universal scoring guarantee and are not reproduced here as a complete calculation tutorial. The reader should inspect the actual guide version and account display if they want to understand a number seen today. A score is meaningful only when its inputs and time frame are known.

One useful interpretation is to treat the dashboard as a log, not a command to transact. An empty category can reveal something not explored, but exploration is optional and may involve cost. A higher score can represent more activity without representing wiser decisions. Likewise, an account with fewer interactions might simply be doing a small number of useful things. The presenters enthusiastic description of farming should therefore remain historical framing. The practical benefit of the activity view is organisation, while the user must decide whether a proposed interaction serves a purpose beyond making a percentage rise.

mySwap, AVNU and the gallery route

Watch this chapter ↗ 03:32

At about 03:32 the presenter points to mySwap and mentions swaps. The narration then discusses a leaderboard and refers to AVNU among additional protocols. Later, around 05:19, he says selected applications can be reached directly from the wallet, showing a list that users can connect to. These are concrete discovery elements in the tour. The transcript does not contain a complete swap record with input, output, price tolerance and final settlement. The article therefore introduces the named services as examples from the interface rather than inventing a transaction result.

A gallery can reduce navigation effort by placing recognised application routes in one workspace. It does not collapse the applications into one legal or technical system. A swap service, a lending service and an NFT application can ask for different permissions and expose users to different outcomes. Being able to launch them from the same wallet makes access convenient, but a user still needs to read the actual request and understand the operation. The video gives a map of where to start; it is not an audit of each listed protocol.

For any proposed interaction, write the purpose in plain language before signing. If the purpose is to exchange one asset for another, check the pair and expected amount. If it is to provide liquidity, understand that the resulting position is different from a simple token balance. If it is to obtain an NFT, identify the actual item and cost. These examples explain why the gallery and score are complementary interface features rather than guarantees. The gallery finds an action, and the score records activity; neither makes every action necessary or financially beneficial.

The leaderboard and the airdrop language are not allocation evidence

Watch this chapter ↗ 07:51

Around 07:51 the presenter argues for choosing Braavos for the approaching Starknet period, highlighting the score and application gallery. Near 08:20 he discusses the possibility of a large airdrop and says hints are visible in a leaderboard. These are optimistic interpretations in a February 2024 presentation. The recording does not reproduce an official distribution agreement establishing an amount for every user. A leaderboard can rank activity according to its own rules without determining a separate organisations token allocation. The article does not promise that following the interface will produce a reward.

Distinguish a network distribution, a wallet promotion and a protocol incentive. They can happen near each other and involve related accounts, while each has its own issuer and criteria. The video speaks broadly about preparation and farming, so a reader should resist combining all possible rewards into one guaranteed outcome. A future possibility is a forecast. An official entitlement requires a dated source with clear conditions. This is especially important now because the recording belongs to a past distribution period and its urgency cannot be applied to todays account activity.

A cost record can make the distinction concrete. Track any transaction fee and the actual purpose of the interaction, while keeping potential rewards out of realised income until they are established and received. This is not a recommendation to carry out a series of transactions. It is a way to avoid treating speculation as a subsidy for activity that would otherwise not be useful. The product may help organise exploration, but exploring solely because a score suggests an unverified reward is a separate decision. The review is useful when it helps identify that boundary.

Adoption and funding comparisons remain attributed claims

Watch this chapter ↗ 05:56

From around 05:56 the presenter turns to the wallets position in the market. He discusses growth over about eighteen months and, near 06:51, says Braavos has around forty percent of the market. He also compares more than ten million dollars of Braavos funding with five million dollars associated with Argent. These are claims made in the narration. The article does not independently audit the funding rounds or market-share calculation, and it does not expand a Starknet smart-wallet comparison into a claim about every crypto wallet worldwide.

To interpret a share figure, identify what is counted and when. Accounts, active accounts, transactions and assets are different denominators. The supplied captions do not preserve a full methodological explanation. A rounded percentage can be useful historical context while remaining insufficient for a technical ranking. Funding likewise says something about a companies reported financing, not automatically about the safety of every user operation or the availability of money to compensate losses. A comparison of capital raised is not a comparison of all product behaviours.

The presenter also points to the chief executive, captioned with a name that can be resolved as Motty Lavie in the primary partnership announcement. Public leadership information helps identify the intended company, but it is not a substitute for studying how the wallet handles signing and recovery. The useful question is which documented feature meets the users need. Popularity and financing can prompt further research, while practical selection still depends on compatibility, control and understandable operations. This reading preserves the historical adoption story without allowing a large round number to settle questions it does not measure.

The January partnership was a development announcement

Watch this chapter ↗ 07:09

At approximately 07:09 the presenter discusses a strategic partnership announced on 31 January 2024. The original description links to the corresponding Braavos article. That primary announcement identifies the Starknet Foundation as the partner and discusses security, DeFi infrastructure, multi-signature capabilities and community development. These are the announced collaboration areas. They provide a firmer identity and scope than a vague reference to a partnership. The article does not infer that every future improvement mentioned there was already complete or available to every account when the video was recorded.

A development partnership can matter because wallet experience and network capabilities are related. Better account controls may depend on what the network supports, while application access can shape onboarding. That does not give a user a direct ownership stake in either organisation or a guaranteed token reward. Announcements express plans and strategic direction; operational claims need the released feature and its instructions. A reader can ask which promised area later produced a usable product and which remains a proposal. Keeping that distinction avoids treating the word partnership as a universal certificate.

The timing is particularly relevant. The announcement predates the video by roughly two weeks and helps explain the presenters enthusiasm. It belongs to the same historical product narrative rather than a new current offer. The original link remains valuable for understanding what was communicated then. If researching the wallet today, use later dated materials to track subsequent changes instead of retroactively inserting them into the 2024 tour. This preserves an accurate sequence: a partnership was announced, the presenter highlighted it, and any later implementation needs its own evidence.

Security language should lead to understanding the actual account

Watch this chapter ↗ 08:38

Near 08:38 the presenter closes with a strong claim about advanced security and reassurance concerning STRK assets. That is promotional language in the source, not a technical proof that all loss scenarios are impossible. Current Braavos information describes biometric multifactor signing and a self-custody model. The useful response is to learn what the chosen configuration actually requires, how devices participate and what recovery process applies. This article does not claim to have tested an exploit, audited the implementation or recovered a lost account.

A security feature has a defined task. An extra signer can change who must authorise a transaction, but it cannot decide whether a user-approved trade is economically sensible. A warning can identify some known threats without proving that every unflagged application is harmless. Recovery can depend on the actual setup rather than a generic assumption that any seed phrase works identically in all wallets. These are explanatory distinctions connected to the closing security claims. They help a reader ask concrete questions instead of either accepting absolute reassurance or dismissing the design entirely.

Braavos part one is most useful as an introduction to a network-aware wallet: Starknet context, several access routes, an activity dashboard, protocol discovery and a dated development partnership. Its optimistic farming language belongs to early 2024 and should not become a present guarantee. The practical reading is to choose a purpose, understand the account and signing boundary, verify the application interaction and use the dashboard as information. The original homepage provides a route to current product documentation, while this article keeps the historical claims and technical clarification visible. That makes the review informative without manufacturing personal rewards, test results or certainty the sources do not establish.

Review links & sources

Explore the platform ↗

This review is sponsored. Based on the original February 2024 description and automatic Arabic transcript. Airdrop prospects, market-share figures and financing comparisons are historical presenter claims, not verified future entitlements. Primary Starknet material clarifies that validity proofs do not automatically make all activity private. The dated Braavos Pro Score guide and partnership announcement provide limited context, separate from any present reward campaign. The original homepage link is preserved exactly.

Original video & source ↗

Official documentation & sources

THE ORIGINAL CHANNEL VIDEO

Watch the
full walkthrough.

This page brings together the original video and its topic collection. Watch on YouTube for the creator’s full presentation, demonstrations, and description.

Watch on YouTube