INDIANAPOLIS — Kyle Larson experienced his first crash at Indianapolis Motor Speedway on Thursday, the second day that Indianapolis 500 drivers participated in open testing on the 2.5-mile oval.
The 2021 NASCAR champion spun coming out of the first turn, hit the wall and bounced down to the warmup lane before tapping the wall a second time and eventually rolling to a stop.
Larson blamed himself, saying he forgot to hit the weight jacker going into the turn. But he also tried to find some positive from the incident.
“I’m happy to crash my first Indy car and live through it,” Larson said.
IN THE WALL 😬@KyleLarsonRacin makes contact with the wall exiting Turn 1 and in Turn 2.
📺: INDYCAR YouTube pic.twitter.com/5TE5c1BXDs
— NTT INDYCAR SERIES (@IndyCar) April 24, 2025
An Arrow McLaren official told The Indianapolis Star that Larson will not take part in the Thursday afternoon practice session due to the crash damage. The team decided not to rush the repairs, which would have left minimal practice time at best, the official said.
Larson is attempting to complete “the double” by racing in both the Indianapolis 500 and NASCAR’s Coca-Cola 600 on May 25. His first attempt was thwarted by a rain delay in the 2024 Indy 500 that saw him arrive to the NASCAR race just as that race was called off for weather.
He wasn’t the only familiar name to crash Thursday. Two-time Indianapolis 500 winner Takuma Sato crashed shortly after Larson, losing the back end of his car in the first turn and smacking the wall hard in the short chute before rolling to a stop.
“Lost it,” Sato said. “I simply lost it.”
Both drivers were checked at the infield hospital and released.
Graham Rahal also tapped the wall late in Wednesday’s practice.
Series officials added horsepower to the cars for the Thursday morning session as they test the IndyCar hybrid, which makes its IMS debut next month. An afternoon session without the boost closes out the two-day test.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Opinion by: Igor Zemtsov, chief technology officer at TBCC
Crypto security is a ticking time bomb. Updatable firmware might just be the match that lights the fuse.
Hardware wallets have become the holy grail of self-custody, the ultimate safeguard against hackers, scammers and even government overreach. There’s an inconvenient truth, however, that most people ignore: Firmware updates aren’t just security patches.
They’re potential backdoors, waiting for someone — whether a hacker, a rogue developer or a shady third party — to kick them wide open.
Every time a hardware wallet manufacturer pushes an update, users are forced to make a choice. Hit that update button and hope for the best, or refuse to update and risk using outdated software with unknown vulnerabilities. Either way, it’s a gamble.
In crypto, a bad gamble can mean waking up to an empty wallet.
Firmware updates aren’t always your friend
Updating firmware sounds like common sense. More security! Fewer bugs! Better user experience!
Here’s the thing: Every update is also an opportunity not just for the wallet provider but for anyone with the power, or motivation, to tamper with the process.
Hackers dream of firmware vulnerabilities. A rushed or poorly audited update can introduce tiny, almost imperceptible flaws — ones that sit in the background, waiting for the right moment to drain funds. And the best part? Users will never know what hit them.
Then there’s the more unsettling possibility: deliberate backdoors.
Recent: Hardware wallet Ledger helps competitor Trezor resolve security vulnerability
Tech companies have been forced to include government-mandated surveillance tools before. What makes anyone think hardware wallet makers are exempt? If a regulatory agency — or worse, a criminal organization — wants access to private keys, firmware updates are the perfect attack vector. One hidden function. One disguised line of code.
That’s all it takes. Still think firmware updates are harmless?
Firmware vulnerabilities are already being exploited
This isn’t some far-fetched, doomsday scenario. It has already happened.
Ledger, one of the biggest names in crypto security, had a major security crisis in 2018 when security researcher Saleem Rashid exposed a vulnerability that allowed attackers to replace Ledger Nano S firmware and hijack private keys. Nearly 1 million devices were at risk before a fix was rolled out. The scary part? There was no way for users to know if their devices had already been compromised.
In 2023, OneKey suffered a similar nightmare. White hat hackers demonstrated that its firmware could be cracked in mere seconds. No crypto was lost — this time. But what if real attackers had found the flaw first?
Then came the “Dark Skippy” exploit, taking firmware-based attacks to an entirely new level. With just two signed transactions, hackers could extract a user’s entire seed phrase — without setting off a single alarm. If firmware updates can be manipulated this easily, how can anyone be sure their assets are safe?
The hidden price of updatable firmware
To be fair, not all firmware updates are security disasters. Ledger uses a proprietary operating system and secure element chips for added protection now. Trezor takes an open-source approach, allowing the community to scrutinize its firmware. Coldcard and BitBox02 give users manual control over updates, reducing — but not eliminating — risk.
Here’s the real question: Can users ever be 100% sure that an update won’t introduce a fatal flaw?
Some wallets have decided to eliminate the risk altogether. Tangem ships with fixed, non-updatable firmware, meaning that its code can never be altered once the device leaves the factory. No updates. No patches.
Of course, this approach has its trade-offs. If a vulnerability is discovered, there’s no way to fix it. But in security, predictability matters.
Real crypto security means taking back control
The crypto market was worth $2.79 trillion as of March 2025. With that much money on the table, cybercriminals, rogue insiders and overreaching governments are always looking for weak points. Hardware wallet makers should be laser-focused on security.
Choosing a hardware wallet shouldn’t feel like gambling with private keys. It shouldn’t involve blind trust in a corporation’s ability to push updates responsibly. Users deserve more than vague reassurances. They deserve security models that put control where it belongs — with them.
Security isn’t about convenience. It’s about control. Any system that requires trusting unknown developers, opaque update processes or firmware that can be changed at will? That’s not control. That’s a liability.
The only real way to keep a hardware wallet safe? Remove the guesswork. Strip away the blind trust. Always research the developers’ backgrounds, check their track record for security incidents, and see how they’ve handled past vulnerabilities. Stick to verifiable facts — security should never be based on assumptions.
Opinion by: Igor Zemtsov, chief technology officer at TBCC.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway