|
Title: "iswatchonly": false, misleading? Post by: Decadenze on December 02, 2022, 12:30:29 PM Hi.
On my journey down the bitcoin rabbit hole i stumbled across something i consider confusing, or misleading. Some info: Bitcoin Core 22.0 linux ARM version running on a raspberry pi with debian. I bought a coldcard wallet, created a descriptor wallet in bitcoin core with the arguments disable_private_keys=true descriptors=true, and imported the descriptor key's into the wallet with the argument "watchonly": true. When i do a getadressinfo query for the addresses, it shows as ""iswatchonly": false,". From bitcoininformation.org on watchonly: "Definition An address or pubkey script stored in the wallet without the corresponding private key, allowing the wallet to watch for outputs but not spend them." Isn't that a little bit misleading or confusing? It sure confused me. Per definition, as far as i can figure out at least, "iswatchonly: false" means that bitcoin core has the corresponding private key. Which it does not. I did a getdescriptorinfo to double check that the descriptors i imported does not contain the private key, and the output clearly shows "hasprivatekeys: false". Is this a bug, or is this intended? Or is there something i don't understand here? Title: Re: "iswatchonly": false, misleading? Post by: nc50lc on December 02, 2022, 01:28:21 PM Is this a bug, or is this intended? Or is there something i don't understand here? I had a similar (answered) question in this thread where we discussed a similar setup: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414023.msg61052365#msg61052365You can also read my reply next to it for additional info. Title: Re: "iswatchonly": false, misleading? Post by: Decadenze on December 02, 2022, 02:40:11 PM Is this a bug, or is this intended? Or is there something i don't understand here? I had a similar (answered) question in this thread where we discussed a similar setup: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5414023.msg61052365#msg61052365You can also read my reply next to it for additional info. Ok. So it is intended to be this way then I guess. Nevertheless, quite confusing. |