Bitcoin Forum

I think, the one which does not spend UTXO or at least offers a choice not to spend the UTXO, will serve the best...

I don't know which one works the best, but I do know which one works the worst definitely.

Stay away from blockchain.info wallet !!!

Bitcoin Core seems the most logical choice, I think. Armory allows you to handle this too, probably Electrum, but don't quote me on that. breadwallet also handles the situation quite well, but I'm not sure if it allows you to spend unconfirmed.

It seems blockchain.info has shortened their pruning time. Hence, Tx affected by malleability are getting cleared from their nodes sooner and hence users are being able to reuse those UTXO faster.

Since coinbase pays the fee for their users i am using it.
The fee that they applies at the time of melleability attack is somewhere at 0.0002-0.0004
But dont consider coinbase as a wallet because they don't give you private key. GL

Coinbase does not need to pay anything fro their internal settlement. But, Coinbase is paying Tx fee even when the Tx is going out of Coinbase too?

I have used coinbase many times and until now yes.
Here is an article about "Does Coinbase pay bitcoin miner fees?"
https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/815435-does-coinbase-pay-bitcoin-miner-fees-

First of all, UTXO generally stands for Unspent tx(transaction) Outputs, and you must spend an unspent transaction output in order to create a valid transaction.

Based on the title of this thread, I will assume that you are looking for a wallet that will not attempt to spend an unconfirmed output from a transaction that has not yet confirmed, and will answer accordingly.

First of all, you should be sure not to reuse addresses, and doing this will make it much easier to avoid spending an unconfirmed output.

Once you are following the above rule, you will want to find a wallet that allows for coin control. I would personally recommend using electrum as it is a lightweight client (meaning it takes up very little resources), that will generally be able to validate when you have received a transaction, and is deterministic (so all you need to recover your private key is your recovery seed). You can use the coin control features with electrum (both "freeze" addresses, and "send from") to spend only inputs that are confirmed. You can "freeze" addresses when you do not wish to spend BTC "in" those addresses, and you can "send from" addresses whose inputs have sufficient confirmations (you can even select multiple addresses to "send from").

If you are already running a full node locally (or if you are giving immediate credit to people who send you BTC) then you may want to use armory. Using armory will require you to run a full node locally, so any transactions will be fully validated which requires an incremental lesser amount of trust then using a light weight wallet. Armory has similar coin control features that electrum has, although I believe they are titled something different.

I only use Mycellium.

I think miltibit should handle it good because it don't let you spend btc who isn't confirmed. That way you will not have problem with double spend like those who blockchain give you when you spend unconfirmed btc and one of the inputs get mutated by the malleability bug.

I'm the user of Multibit and Electrum. Any user experience with these wallets must be most appreciated. Right now I do not have any need to spend my bitcoin but for the precautious step I need to know how to handle the attack and do not get panic.

The best wallet selector website I've found yet, check it out -> https://bitcoin.org/en/choose-your-wallet

These are not all the wallets available, but it's a good start.  Good luck!

i've heard that 1 confirmation, isn't enough to be sure that your transaction was spent, with this fancy attack?

i must wait for six confirmation for the time being? or i can... dunno, goes well with 3?

Just use the Core and don't hurry, so you can afford several confirmations before spending, and you will be safe

Electrum had problems with the attack, e.g. showing a wrong balance IIRC. I personally would agree with core, not only because it detects conflicting transactions which allow you to be aware of an issue. It also allows you to hand pick the inputs you use with coin controll enabled, thus even if you are waiting for your change from TX 1 to get confirmed you can use a different input for a 2nd TX right away. On top of that its the only major wallet[1] I have not seen anyone having issues with. That being said I also did not see any posts about issues with most mobile wallets, but I dont see many posts about them in general.

With all that being said, I would not switch my wallet just because of the attack. I would guess that most wallets that had massiv problems are not being improved.


One confirmation is enough, two if you want to make sure you dont catch an orphaned block. The important thing is that your wallet knows which is the correct TX ID. If it picks the one that does not get confirmed any following TX will not confirm either. Once any of the two TX is confirmed the other is invalid and should be gone from most mempools.

[1] Core, Multibit(HD), Electrum, blockchain.info are IMHO the major wallets discussed here.

using MyCelium and no problems.

I've just been a simpleton since my start in the bitcoin network. I've just been a die-hard Core/QT user. I understand that it's pointless for everyone to host a full-node, but it seems to always hold the "steadiest".

No probs with mycelium here either.

Yup... that's what I mean. Thanks for the explanation. :)

As long as you stick to one of the main popular wallets I guess there won't be any problem. Just don't trust unconfirmed transactions and check balance with multiple block explorers that is not bc. I recommend btc.blockr.io



Yeah, but at the moment, blockchain.info seems to have fixed it. No more negative or huge balances. :D

Since Trezor updated myTrezor.com have had no problems using Trezor either with it or Multibit HD.

Is Trezor wallet software implementing BIP 62?

Trezor signs LowS confirmed (https://github.com/trezor/trezor-crypto/blob/master/ecdsa.c#L768).

Try the mycellium.

Use bitcoin-qt always.

malleability is always from a corrupted (or not BIP66 enforced) branch of client "connected" to the bitcoin network.
Bitcoin usually clients can not use the respend feature of a successfully emited transaction.

Rather than knowing the best wallet to use I'd like to know if there are any wallets we should avoid because of how they cope with malleability. Are they all OK if we wait for six confirmations or are there some that malfunction even after six confirmations? I haven't moved many Bitcoins since the attack so I have not experienced the malleability problem yet.

A single confirmation should be enough. If want to avoid issues with orphaned blocks, go for two confirmations. Deeper reorgs of blocks are rare.

From what I read here, the most problematic wallet in that regard is blockchain.info. Not only did it handle the malleated TX badly, it also changed the balance to values that have nothing to do with the state of the blockchain. E.g. your balance could have doubled or gone negative. It also allowed you to build TX on top of this nonsense AFAIK. This might have been fixed durring their latest downtime, but I would still use a different wallet ASAP.

I like to see topics like these discussed.
New users of BTC need to read threads like these and get informed as soon as possible.
We as a community need to do a better job of educating the general public.
The safer, easier, & faster the average users experience with bitcoin, the better.
 
With Apple pay rolling out new commercials lately, we need to be more vigilant in our efforts to educate people on why bitcoin is the single best form of payment for goods and services globally.

For the record, I have used BitcoinCore and MyCelium for a long time with no issues.

I think all wallets work similarly if not the same so I say it doesn't matter which one is selected.

i used breadwallet for a while, then it absolutly shit it's self and never worked right agian.  always frezzing and crashing

I tried bit coin chain and found its working well all right but its good to discuss on the forum here to get to know more information about bit coins wallets performances and for further guidance to all friends.

Anything but Bitcoin Core is a risk to me. Sure im a paranoid, but as long as I can rull Bitcoin Core I will run it, that's I would hate so much that only big corporations can run nodes. I want to be able to run a node in my computer now and in 2064.

if you ask me i would suggest mycellium,i only use that...its quite good you can use it