It's just busy grinding through all the transaction/block verification etc... and a lot of the calls are not "async", so it causes the UI issues occasionally. There are already a number of issues on the github: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+UI+freezeIf you know you want to just look at the wallet and aren't fussed about the syncing, click the little "network" icon in the bottom right corner and it'll instantly disconnect and stop syncing... then you're free to do whatever you like in the wallet without needing to worry about the UI freezing up on you... once you've completed whatever it is that you want to do in the wallet, just click the icon again to reconnect and continue syncing:  and  |
|
|
|
It's just text... so you can transfer it however you light... the most common way is to simply transfer a file containing the exported, unsigned transaction using a usb stick. Some folks use cameras and QR Codes... But if you're a complete masochist, you can definitely type it in manually if you wish  Although, why anyone in their right mind would even attempt something like this is beyond me... it's hard enough typing a Bitcoin Address in by hand without making any errors... let along a long unsigned transaction hex string!  |
|
|
|
By the way, thank you for the advice. If I experience the same thing again, it means that I have to disable Tor.
Not necessarily... it's quite possible it was just fixed by the time I tested and posted my message  It was ~14 hours after you posted after all |
|
|
|
Testing a new feature...  -----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
07 Feb 2021 TryNinjaBOT a.k.a TryNinja
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
1NinjabXd5znM5zgTcmxDVzH4w3nbaY16L
GyH0NvfQfmU59LJykB76DoKtM5V2T1La0J7DPL1nLDtaCRfimwxs9oU09KEwNk/UnRPB/rRBr2kzKKhsy7vssxA=
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE----- Quoted... and verifiedWhat is this new "feature"? |
|
|
|
Isn't there a tool out there to bruteforce a sentence with one bad word?
I think so but if not I can make one quickly
Yep... btcrecover can usually work it out fairly quickly... however you need the "incorrect" seed, and a known address generated by that wallet. Sounds like the OP may not have the address.  This is the most "up to date" version of btcrecover (that has added extra features over the original by gurnec): https://github.com/3rdIteration/btcrecover |
|
|
|
You can see a pictorial guide for exporting keys here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4746784.msg43255691#msg43255691Note that "show unused" is important, as otherwise Armory will only show the private keys to the addresses that it thinks are "used", which could be a problem in your particular case! Also, as mentioned in that guide, if you know the specific address you're trying to extract the coins from, you can check the "Show Address" option and then hunt for that specific address/key so you can import just that one. Note: DON'T copy the "PrivBase58:" text when you're copying pasting the keys into Electrum... you only want the 51 or 52 characters that start with "5", "K" or "L". |
|
|
|
Installed the 0.96 versión on a Windows 10 laptop machine. Lots of ram, powerful processor, m.2 drives, etc.
Don't use this version... it's old and outdated and likely won't work with new versions of Bitcoin Core. I assume you went to btcarmory.com... don't... that website is no longer the "official" homepage for Armory. Get 0.96.5 from here: https://btcarmory.com/The main window says "Armory is scanning...."
I can't see any evidence that it is doing anything. The "Preparing Databases" is BOLD but there is no activity in the little bar to the right of that where I'd expect there to be a progress bar.
When checking the logs, I'm seeing error messages regarding directories that do not exist.
...
Here's what I get with 0.96.5
(ERROR) ArmoryUtils.pyc:3735 - Unsupported language specified. Defaulting to English (en)
(ERROR) ArmoryQt.py:1862 - Failed to setup SDM
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "ArmoryQt.py", line 1857, in startBitcoindIfNecessary
File "SDM.pyc", line 190, in setupSDM
BitcoindError: bitcoind not found
(ERROR) BDM.pyc:197 - DB error: C:\Users\<myname>\AppData\Roaming/Bitcoin/blocks is not a valid path
Do you actually have Bitcoin Core installed and fully synced?  Armory requires Bitcoin Core to be installed, fully synced and NON pruned to be able to function properly. If you do have Bitcoin Core installed, what is the Bitcoin "Datadir" as shown in Bitcoin Core in the "Window - Information" screen?  ...
-INFO - 15:24:37.015: (e:\users\goat\code\armory3\cppforswig\bdm_server.h:263) Listening on port 9001
-ERROR - 15:24:37.015: (e:\users\goat\code\armory3\cppforswig\bdm_server.cpp:1277) There is already a process listening on 127.0.0.1:9001
-ERROR - 15:24:37.015: (e:\users\goat\code\armory3\cppforswig\bdm_server.cpp:1279) ArmoryDB cannot start under these conditions. Shutting down!
-ERROR - 15:24:37.015: (e:\users\goat\code\armory3\cppforswig\bdm_server.cpp:1280) Make sure to shutdown the conflicting processbefore trying again (most likely another ArmoryDB instance).
This could be indicative of a "ghost" ArmoryDB process that is hung, running in the background... either use Windows Task Manager to kill it... or simply reboot your PC, before attempting to run Armory again. |
|
|
|
I've installed Armory wallet management on my PC (Windows 10) and it's just running through the "Build Databases" phase with Computing balance box showing one second....
It's been like this for over 24 hours and it's still showing as node offline.
Unfortunately, it sounds like something has "broken" somewhere... When I installed bitcoin core it was a very large download and took a long time to synchronise databases.
Is this the same ??
Sort of, but unless you have a VERY slow PC, I wouldn't expect it to take more than a few hours... my old i5-3570k with 8 Gigs of RAM can redo the Armory databases in about 2 hours. I'm wondering if I maybe have a corrupt download of armory or does it just take this amount of time to build databases ??
I don't think it's a corrupt download of Armory, but possibly either some corrupt blocks in Bitcoin Core... or you're running Bitcoin Core in "pruned" mode... or Bitcoin Core is not configured to properly accept connections from Armory... or Armory is not configured to connect to Bitcoin Core properly. Can you please post your log files? Either use the "Export log files..." option in Armory, or find the armorylog.txt and dbLog.txt files in your Armory datadir. They're quite likely very large, but if you use: https://pastebin.com/ you'll be able to copy/paste the contents of the log file there... then click "create new paste", then you can copy/paste the uniquely generated URL of your paste here. |
|
|
|
any other Desktop wallet then (which preferably runs on Debian Linux)?
Personally... I would recommend Electrum. It's a solid wallet, popular and well proven and compatible with a lot of hardware wallets should you want to go that way in the future. It also provides a number of "advanced" options (like full customisation of fees, PayToMany, RBF, coin control, "freezing" of specific UTXOs or addresses etc) However, it should be noted that while Electrum can import BIP39 seeds from other wallets (and lets you specify custom derivation paths etc), the seeds that Electrum actually generates are not BIP39 compatible. So, your options for moving to another wallet because a lot smaller (I'm aware of maybe 2 wallets that can either import an Electrum wallet seed or wallet file - BlueWallet and Sparrow Wallet) It's one of the big downsides to Electrum, but at least they're open about it: https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/seedphrase.htmlAnd there are open-source tools for deriving the private keys from Electrum seeds, should Electrum not be available for whatever reason: https://github.com/FarCanary/ElectrumSeedTester |
|
|
|
No issues with Trezor Suite here at the moment (2021-07-02 01:10 UTC)... it seems to be functioning fine... same with wallet.trezor.io website. Also, I note in your screenshot that you have TOR enabled... I didn't when running Trezor Suite... perhaps it is something with the TOR connection preventing your Trezor Suite from working properly? Maybe try without TOR and see if it works. |
|
|
|
Yes, I understand that part. But I would like to delete that wallet from the computer after generating the keys (address) and keep only the seed backup phrase. I wonder if there is a method to further protect a seed phrase from unauthorized use in case someone finds it.
For example, something like NeuroticFish suggested. But I'm not sure how secure the approach of inserting extra words would be and whether it would be easy to decode a potential thief.
The idea isn't that you insert extra words into the seed... and it's implemented in BIP39 already... it's the "BIP39 Passphrase"... the idea is that you have a "passphrase" that you store separately to the 12/24 words... A user may decide to protect their mnemonic with a passphrase. If a passphrase is not present, an empty string "" is used instead.
Some wallet providers refer to this as "custom words" or the "25th word" etc... Essentially, it's just a passphrase that is used in conjunction with the 12/24 words to generate the seed. If you use this method, just make sure that they are stored separately. If you store them together, you're effectively making the BIP39 passphrase pointless. Also note that you will need both to recover your wallet... the 12/24 word seed phrase will be useless without the passphrase... and vice versa. How you go about storing the passphrase is up to you... some people treat it like a "password" and just use memory, never writing it down or storing it anywhere... but that method has risks, as human memory is quite "fragile". I've been thinking more about how to randomize word order or something like that. This is asking for trouble... There have been numerous threads on these boards in the past where users have attempted to create some sort of system for randomising or otherwise obfuscating the seed phrase and then being unable to "undo" it to recover their wallets. Use a BIP39 passphrase, or an established method like shamir secret sharing. Don't try and be "clever"... it probably won't work. Would it be possible to add an additional layer of protection to seed phrase paper wallet?
Paper wallet do not generate seed phrase, it generate private key and address. @Charles-Tim, he isn't talking about a "normal" paper wallet... he is asking about ways to secure the 12/24 word seed written down on paper... calling it a "paper wallet" was probably not a great idea, as it is easily confused with the more common "single private key + public key + address" type of paper wallet as generated by bitaddress.org etc. I think the phrase "paper seed backup" or something similar is probably a better description... |
|
|
|
Why doesn't it work? Why are the keys not identical? If I wanted to switch from Atomic to Exodus with some active currencies, it would not work like this. Is any of my expectations wrong?
Because wallet developers are free to use literally any derivation path that they want... unfortunately, while we have BIP44, BIP49 and BIP84... not all wallet developers follow them... For the "bad news"™ check here: https://walletsrecovery.org/You can see how a lot of wallets have all sorts of weird and wonderful ways of using derivation paths Even worse is when they don't actually document the derivation paths used anywhere And as for Atomic and it's ETH keys:  Non-Standard derivation path for non-BTC coins, [EXTERNAL RECOVERY NOT DOCUMENTED].
However, the "good news"™ is that you are actually thinking about this stuff and investigating your backup/recovery options... BEFORE you actually need them. So, Kudos to you. I hope you manage to find some wallets that work the way you want them to! |
|
|
|
Thanks, I've tried that but it says invalid mnemonic. Tried using the password too but made no difference.
Then it's possible that one (or more) of the words is "incorrect"... have a look through that BIP39 wordlist for "similar" words that may have been written down/typed out incorrectly... things like kid, kit, kite etc... Then you can import the two "BIP32 Root Key" (the one with xc2 in BIP39 Passphrase and the one without) in Ethereum (I'm not sure bitcoin-core has implemented BIP32 yet) and use your funds if it works
I'm sure you meant "Electrum" And Bitcoin Core does use BIP32 to generate keys in the HD wallets, and with the advent of "descriptors", you can import xpubs and xprvs... using the importdescriptors command, refer: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/descriptors.md#bip32-derived-keys-and-chains |
|
|
|
Or so I thought... That test transfer has the status of "0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool" within Bitcoin Core. I have done some reading on this (other forum posts across the years) and I'm not clear on why is occurring This means that the transaction has been rejected for some reason. Depending on the fee rate used... it's possibly because of the "mempool min fee". But you should really have received an error message when attempting to send it... rather than it just showing as "not in memory pool". You can attempt to rebroadcast it... right click the transaction, select "Copy Transaction ID":  Then goto the "console" in Bitcoin Core (Window -> Console):  Then enter the command: getrawtransaction PUT_THE_TRANSACTION_ID_HERE
That should give you a big long string of random looking "hex" characters... 0-9A-F... copy paste that string and use the command: sendrawtransaction PUT_THE_HEX_STRING_HERE
If it all goes well, you should receive the "TransactionID" as output...  However, if, instead of the TransactionID being returned, you get some other error message, post the error message here. |
|
|
|
as we all know merit is a reflection of good posts on this forum
Not even close... that was the "theory"... the reality is far, far different. Honestly, in my opinion, for what it is worth... merit is one of the most useless metrics of "post quality" on this forum. Aside from the complete subjectivity of what someone believes to be a "good" post, it's been "abused" and "sold" too much for it to be of any true value in determining "post quality" |
|
|
|
can I just copy the private keys form electrum into ledger nano,
instead of sending the bitcoins to it, to avoid fees?
Or is that the worst way to to it?
No, you can't do that... Ledger Nano does not have the ability to import private keys because, as you have already guessed, it is indeed the worst way to do it... The entire premise of a hardware wallet, is that the seed and private keys are only ever generated/stored within the device itself (aside from your offline/paper backup of the 24 word backup phrase). If you take a seed or keys that were generated elsewhere, and import them into your hardware wallet, there is no way of knowing if that seed or private keys were potentially exposed since they were created. Fees are currently relatively cheap in the 10sats/byte range... don't risk your coins for the sake of a couple of bucks worth of fees! |
|
|
|
The only explanation, given the information you have offered, is that the passphrase you are entering is incorrect... The BIP39 passphrase mechanism will not tell you if your passphrase is "incorrect"... it will just generate a completely different set of private keys/addresses. This is both a blessing (it's the foundation for the plausible deniability and "hidden" wallets etc)... and, as you are discovering, a curse... as it makes it when dealing with "typos". Does your password use a combination of lower/upper/symbols/numbers? If so, do you hold "SHIFT" when typing UPPERCASE or symbo!s? It seems like a simple "typo" had resulted in a "double UPPER" or something like that... ie. instead of typing "Password", you've accidentally typed "PAssword"... or possibly the reverse... and you've missed one... so instead of "P@ssword", you've entered "P2ssword" Given that your password is apparently "short and easy to remember", it should theoretically be possible to recover it by bruteforce if necessary... Although, I'd recommend trying different combinations yourself manually if possible... as to brute force it, you're going to need to (potentially) "expose" your seed by typing it into the computer when running the bruteforce scripts like "btcrecover"... which will compromise the integrity of all your wallets/keys. |
|
|
|
My original plan was to just be patient and let the QT network synch, but this had gotten progressively slower to the point that now it is so slow it has become intolerable, and getting more so.
Did you update to "Bitcoin Core" yet? Latest version is 0.21.0... I would recommend making a backup (or two) of your wallet.dat before updating. If you didn't update, what version are you actually running? I am willing to wait awhile for the synch, I’m not in a huge rush to use my funds, just like I said the current speed has become incredibly slow. If so, I am running a PC with Windows 10. Is there anything else you need to know for this?
Do you know what processor and how much RAM your computer has? Also, do you know if it is using an SSD (Solid State Drive) or an HDD (Hard Disk drive) for storage? [Wondering what the community thinks about this? Is one of these methods less risky than the other? Any advice or tips that I can get to help me do this would be appreciated
The least risky method is, as previously stated, just letting Bitcoin Core finish syncing. Where exactly is it up to in the syncing process? Also, your transaction appears to have dropped from the network, I cannot find txid: "020d601b2908df3af33a288f37965a6dceb3542173a11528b6906b1643c0d642" anywhere You may need to rebroadcast this transaction if you still want it to go through. However, if it isn't needed urgently, I would recommend that you update to the latest Bitcoin Core and wait for it to fully sync before you attempt to make any transactions. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
