[tbrizitsky]

It depends. The ideal hardware wallet is always off, disconnected, the seed phrase is encoded, split into pieces and buried in a WWII bunker. It would be incredibly secure and unusable.

Let's take a look at U•HODL:

Fingerprint scanner (even the best one) is less secure than a long PIN code (and few people use them), but scanning only takes a moment while entering a PIN code requires tens of seconds. And after several failed scans, the device is locked.

Is Bluetooth less secure than a cable? Even if all internal communication is heavily encrypted there is still a small chance that it can be hijacked. On the other hand, the device has a MiTM protection and wireless communication is much more usable on the go.

Is it possible to get access to your data after stealing a key? It's also plausible and you may find information about attacks on existing wallets. But all vendors try to fix these vulnerabilities once they're found.

U•HODL is no less secure than any other hardware wallet, it's just designed with a user in mind.