Is there any problems at all if I just keep the legacy format?
achow101 mentioned legacy wallet support will be dropped on Bitcoin Core 27.0[1]. If you decide to use that version in future, you must convert legacy wallet to descriptor wallet. Also this always sounded more secure to me even if you required to make backups each time you generated new addresses to keep them: The original Bitcoin Core wallet was a collection of unrelated private keys. I don't see how it's more secure unless you assume master private key alone could be brute-forced or stolen. [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5469585.msg62962204#msg62962204I see a problem with this: This is one of the most noticeable differences. With descriptor wallets, you cannot export the private key for one address. This is because a child private key combined with the parent public key can be used to compute the parent private key (and hence all other child private keys). This is a risk inherent in BIP 32's unhardened derivation. As such, descriptor wallets disallow the export of child private keys in order to mitigate the risk of accidentally exposing the parent private key.
But you shouldn't be exporting individual private keys anyways. The wallet does not use just one private key, so having an individual child private key is really not that useful. If you want to export a private key that contains a reasonable amount to carry on a phone and import it into the phones Electrum wallet or whatever, then with the new format you wouldn't be able to do this, because apparently you will not be able to export individual private keys due the new format. What I've read is that it makes watch only wallet creation much easier. Also can you finally have a seed that generates the wallet safely like on Electrum if on a worst case scenario you lose your wallet file or that's not possible? From what I read this wasn't really secure but I only use Electrum for phone with small amounts anyway. |
|
|
|
|
binance.us se quedara activo para ir obteniendo informacion de usuarios y tenerla directamente a mano sin hacer peticiones a otras jurisdicciones que complican mucho el tema. Esta claro que iba a pasar lo que estamos viendo. Creo que de aqui a 10 años se veran todos estos exchanges como una epoca donde era el wild wild west, y todas esas coins random que se listean a cambio de dinero seran cosas del pasado. Basicamente por que se contemplaran casi todas como securities sin registrar, lo cual dara como resultado problemas y presiones inviables para los dueños de los exhanges. Al final tener un exchange como negocio no sera rentable. El que quiera invertir en cryptoassets exoticos tendra que irse a plataformas igual de exoticas hosteadas en paraisos fiscales que nunca podran tener fiat onramps. Es decir existiran exchanges tipo KuCoin, pero no habra termino medio como un Binance, seran practicamente neobancos y ahi veremos que cryptos no seran consideradas una security. En teoria BTC deberia estar a salvo segun ha dejado caer Gary Gensler pero nunca se sabe.
|
|
|
|
|
Yo habia leido que Argentina tiene unos tratados firmados, no se si con el IMF o algo por estilo, en virtud del cual no se le permite poder hacer lo que hizo Bukele en El Salvador. Tiene mas prioridad la dolarizacion que algo asi, ademas va a tener una tarea titanica para hacerlo. Es el primer presidente libertario de la historia, si sale bien su gestion daria un precedente que a muchos no les conviene, va a tener mucha oposicion para hacer que fracase. Si emite bonos para financiarse y lo hace bien creo que podria ser una inversion en cuanto a renta fija high yield por encima de otras opciones, si realmente su plan de 35 años para hacer Argentina una potencia se cumple, pero claro, es dificil hacer planes a largo plazo cuando los gobiernos duran poco, y a la vez seria un problema si no se dieran cambios en el poder. China puede hacer planes a largo plazo por que no hay alternancia de poder, pero no es algo que sea muy atractivo que digamos en cuanto a ser un ciudadano que vive ahi ni cara a la inversion que para mi personalmente, me parece a evitar ese tipo de paises, donde no sabes si la cuentas son transparentes.
|
|
|
|
making bitcoin legal tender is a difficult thing to do, especially for a country as big as argentina because it will be related to their financial and banking system. maybe argentina's elected president has a passion for bitcoin and calls it a solution to argentina's banking system, but argentina also has a parliamentary system which makes regulations in their country so that the president doesn't just work alone with his vision and mission.
so the implementation of bitcoin in argentina is very unlikely considering that the argentine government has many stakeholders and the president does not only work alone. maybe argentina will launch their cbdc, but making bitcoin legal tender is unlikely.
Anything can happen just like El Salvador did. If they have difficulty improving the value of their currency, why shouldn't they try bitcoin even though there is no guarantee that they will succeed? But if they don't try, if they don't take risks, they will always fail. I support them if they make bitcoin legal tender. Like El Salvador before it, they no longer have any solutions to improve their economy so they may see bitcoin as an opportunity. While not yet successful, they have made significant improvements since accepting bitcoin as legal tender, and I believe Argentina has the same opportunity. Argentina has signed agreements with the IMF that will not allow them to pull an "El Salvador" move, so starting by this, this will not happen. He has higher priorities on his to-do list that are mastodontic by itself, such as the dollarization. He's going to need many millions to fund this process. I could see high yield bonds being bought if he manages to create an interesting scenario for investors. If they are capable of adopting the required measures on each step, he may make it, but he does not have enough power to do it all by himself, he is going to need to find agreements with other parties, and he is also going to have internal and external enemies because they don't want to see a libertarian to do well. |
|
|
|
|
Fees reaching 2018 bubble times, mempool.space site is useful to see this in graphical form. To me this seems like it will be used by Blackrock et al to push another hard fork war that's supported by fiat gateways, this is quite predictable actually, it's the only reason they would allow an ETF to begin with, TPTB wouldn't allow it if it wasn't to control it or at least attempt at doing so.
As far as Ordinals, I don't even know what are those but from what I've read is "NFTs on the Bitcoin blockchain", that was enough for me to not read any further.
|
|
|
|
I've tried Mint on a live CD and it comes way too bloated for my taste, too many media related software that I don't need for this purpose. A basic text editor, a spreadsheet editor, and basic dependencies to compile Bitcoin Core as well as Tor should be it. Im either going to use Xubuntu or try the latest Debian release.
I just tried installing Linux Mint on VM and amount of the bloat isn't as bad i expected. But since it's too bloated, your option is limited to Debian or manually uninstall the bloat. And i expect Xubuntu has many bloat for you needs since the ISO alone has size 2.8GB. I've tried Mint on a live CD and it comes way too bloated for my taste, too many media related software that I don't need for this purpose. A basic text editor, a spreadsheet editor, and basic dependencies to compile Bitcoin Core as well as Tor should be it. Im either going to use Xubuntu or try the latest Debian release. Seems pretty easy to install nowadays compared to back then. Does anyone here use that distro at all? It comes with a full disk encryption setting on the wizard.
I'll try automatic partition setting and just encrypt the whole thing. Im not sure if it encrypts the boot partition too, but I want it to encrypt for sure swap and home. Some people don't realize these may remain unencrypted and leak your data on there.
In that case, use Debian and then replace the default GNOME desktop with an XFCE desktop. I don't recall Debian has default DE since you need to chose the DE either when choosing ISO or during installation. Is that no longer true? The image that shows up here doesn't look like it has the desktop interfaces separated: https://www.debian.org/The download button leads to this file: https://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/current/amd64/iso-cd/debian-12.2.0-amd64-netinst.isoThis requires internet connection to install. Im assuming this contains all the different interfaces. Also im not sure if this will work with an nvidia GPU. Has anyone tried? it may give error since it has free firmware. In that case you may want to try this: Non-free Firmware
This Debian image build only includes Free Software where possible. However, many systems include hardware which depends on non-free firmware to function properly so this build also includes those firmware files for those cases. See the Debian Wiki non-free firmware page for more information. https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/amd64/iso-dvd/And when it comes to partitions, im just going to select it to automatically make whatever partitions are needed, will this encrypt the /home and /swap partitions? I just want to make sure that full disk encryption is applied, but I don't want to screw around with manually doing things. So during the wizard I enter the encryption LVM setting and enter a password, it does encrypt the whole thing? Edit: Found this: https://xo.tc/setting-up-full-disk-encryption-on-debian-9-stretch.html According to this, only the sda5_crypt volume is encrypted? what about the swap one? Also looks like interfaces are included within the iso:  |
|
|
|
I've tried Mint on a live CD and it comes way too bloated for my taste, too many media related software that I don't need for this purpose. A basic text editor, a spreadsheet editor, and basic dependencies to compile Bitcoin Core as well as Tor should be it. Im either going to use Xubuntu or try the latest Debian release. Seems pretty easy to install nowadays compared to back then. Does anyone here use that distro at all? It comes with a full disk encryption setting on the wizard. I'll try automatic partition setting and just encrypt the whole thing. Im not sure if it encrypts the boot partition too, but I want it to encrypt for sure swap and home. Some people don't realize these may remain unencrypted and leak your data on there. I would argue it's good to learn to use the command line (and vi), but it comes with a steep learning curve. After that, it's much more powerful and faster than using a GUI.
Back in my school days I was told GUI is only for the lazy and if I wanted to be cool and fast I should learn Command Line instead. It took me a very long time to understand this because to the average human the Command Line looks like something straight out of a NASA computer. First seemed like a joke. But ended up being true. It is much faster and easier. And you are even told every thing that happens in background most of the time too. Easier to tell why some things go wrong sometimes and can monitor how things run. Things you do not get with Windows or most of the very user friendly focused Operating Systems and GUIs. Amazing to say the least. I recommend any body who is bored to start learning how to use a Terminal, it is a fun process and helps with your mental too. They say your brain is less likely to degrade if you keep learning new things. I used to be console-command only but I realized sometimes you just want to rely on a graphical interface. When manually crafting a raw Bitcoin transaction for instance, you can screw up somewhere by entering the stuff manually. I would rather do it on the GUI. Granted, you always have maximum control with the terminal but this comes with great responsibility, and I don't want to gamble screwing up in the process specially in the context of irreversible transactions. Same goes for full disk encryption. One could write a bible about LUKS setups with the command line but I would rather stick to the basics and get it done on the GUI, unless I really needed something so specific that I required to enter it manually. |
|
|
|
If you had a wallet.dat that was never updated to the new format, and wanted to move to the 25.0 version, does it require any special steps or anything?
The last version I used was around 23.0. I haven't updated since then. I reckon at some point there was some sort of an update on the wallet format that was performed automatically and you didn't have to do anything, not sure if around 0.15 era when segwit was introduced, so im assuming that was applied on the wallet file, but now with the descriptors thing, I've seen some people discussing doing some additional steps. Im old fashioned and I haven't even locked at what the ordinals thing are yet. I use legacy addresses, but had to update because some people request bech32 addresses. As far as I can use Coin Control and generate legacy and bech32 addresses, I would be ok, but im assuming it's best to update for security reasons as bugs get updated. I just don't want to screw up an old wallet in the process. Of course I have backups before any of this is done, but I would like to know if any additional steps are required and why.
If it is a non-HD wallet, upgrade it with -upgradewallet (introduced in 0.17+, I believe). Then use -migratewallet in 0.25 to upgrade to the descriptor wallet. It was 0.17 and it seems it doesn't work or poses some problem when the wallet is encrypted: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14422I would honeslty pass on fiddling with the wallet file unless 100% necessary. Is there any problems at all if I just keep the legacy format? as far as I know, the only issue one would encounter was that there is a limit of addresses you can generate in non-HD wallets before you needed to backup: 1.5 Backup Frequency
The original Bitcoin Core wallet was a collection of unrelated private keys. If a non-HD wallet had received funds to an address and then was restored from a backup made before the address was generated, then any funds sent to that address would have been lost because there was no deterministic mechanism to derive the address again.
Bitcoin Core version 0.13 introduced HD wallets with deterministic key derivation. With HD wallets, users no longer lose funds when restoring old backups because all addresses are derived from the HD wallet seed.
This means that a single backup is enough to recover the coins at any time. It is still recommended to make regular backups (once a week) or after a significant number of new transactions to maintain the metadata, such as labels. Metadata cannot be retrieved from a blockchain rescan, so if the backup is too old, the metadata will be lost forever.
Wallets created before version 0.13 are not HD and must be backed up every 100 keys used since the previous backup, or even more often to maintain the metadata. If you were to generate 101 addresses, what happens to address 101 in practice? Also this always sounded more secure to me even if you required to make backups each time you generated new addresses to keep them: The original Bitcoin Core wallet was a collection of unrelated private keys. |
|
|
|
|
If you had a wallet.dat that was never updated to the new format, and wanted to move to the 25.0 version, does it require any special steps or anything?
The last version I used was around 23.0. I haven't updated since then. I reckon at some point there was some sort of an update on the wallet format that was performed automatically and you didn't have to do anything, not sure if around 0.15 era when segwit was introduced, so im assuming that was applied on the wallet file, but now with the descriptors thing, I've seen some people discussing doing some additional steps. Im old fashioned and I haven't even locked at what the ordinals thing are yet. I use legacy addresses, but had to update because some people request bech32 addresses. As far as I can use Coin Control and generate legacy and bech32 addresses, I would be ok, but im assuming it's best to update for security reasons as bugs get updated. I just don't want to screw up an old wallet in the process. Of course I have backups before any of this is done, but I would like to know if any additional steps are required and why.
|
|
|
|
It's definitely possible. But since OP said "There has to be a simple OS that just works", there are few things i'd like to point.
1. Conflict possibility between DE or default app comes with DE. You might mention you could just remove GNOME, but there's risk you accidentally remove important application or library.
2. I have doubt there won't be any problem when you perform major update (e.g. 20.04 LTS to 22.04 LTS).
Linux Mint fits the bill nicely, for this reason. Does it do any telemetry? Found these comments on this YT video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKggSOKHFZg5 days ago
Even if that wasn't something you could configure, with the open source nature of Linux someone knowledgeable enough could write a script or app and change it anyhow or at least get the effect they want. Also if we are afraid of them collecting data we can use Wireshark or a similar program and see for ourselves. It may be encrypted but we will still see where it is going. You could set up a spare computer just to monitor the network or at least keep a log of network traffic that way and not have it placing any new load on your main computer. That would be helpful for those who like to buy low power computers that are often single board or use a mobile Intel or AMD CPU that while usable for its purpose is not great for gaming or other demanding tasks. 1 month ago
Yes they are you can check that data in Kernel logs, I posted on the mint forums, the mods felt it necessary to delete the part that shows Data being sent. I traced that logs origin This sucks. Has anyone tried building Bitcoin Core from source with Whonix? I was looking at the documents and they have a section for Bitcoin which is nice: https://www.whonix.org/wiki/Bitcoin_CoreAlso I found this article (in German) that says it found unnecessary pings during installation in Arch, EndeavourOS, Manjaro, Garuda, openSUSE, Linux Mint, Ubuntu, and ElementaryOS distros: https://www.michlfranken.de/linux-distros-dns-tracing/Not sure why they would try to ping some server during installation, probably no big deal but still. And I still have to figure out how to avoid any software leaking data from temporary files. I found the software that was doing it on ElementaryOS, it's called "Code", it is basically the Scratch text editor. I wish there was a way to disable all of these things by default because I just find it unnecessary. |
|
|
|
I'm also going to put this out there. While the question that the OP asked is a legitimate question. It does bring up another issue of how many one off situations are there that can happen. Most people are fine with an insecure hot wallet on their phone and the bit of loss of privacy that comes with it. There are ways to get around the privacy issue by running your own node and electrum server and connecting to that. There are ways of using https://tapsigner.com/ or some similar product for more security. You can even have a large amount of funds in an encrypted paper wallet that you import & sweep & then pay the person. There are 100s of different scenarios / options and each person will have to figure out what will work for them. We can go down the rabbit hole of what works for the OP, but for the next person it may not be a good answer. There is not a one size fits all for things like this. So....how do we as a group come up with a general framework that can be more tailored to people, or is it not worth it and we treat every one as an individual thing. -Dave The thing with these devices is, they stand out. It looks like some sort of odd thing you are doing, you don't blend in with the average Joe. This to me is a thing to avoid. The way I see it is that when it comes to mobile transactions, you want to use a device that is not flashy, like a very common looking phone, and do not carry more than you could afford to lose carrying on your physical wallet, in terms of cash. This way, you don't make yourself a target, and if you lose the phone, you wouldn't lose some crazy amount, and you would still have a backup at home anyway. By the time they cracked access to the phone, you just would transact these funds into another address you own. What I want to do now is to find a new phone, because I have some Galaxy phone from 10 years ago, so im assuming this Android version it's using is not updated and thus dangerous to use. And also look at what to do in terms of configuring it to find some reasonable amount of privacy. I've read on Orbot to use Tor on Android phones. I've seen Graphene but that is limited to Google phones. There are no other alternatives? I would then basically use Electrum, and transact through Tor. I would need to consider if I would even need to transact through my node or just use some of the reasonable to use servers through Tor. Since the amounts aren't even big, it should be enough. And I don't want to connect my phone back to my node which is sitting at home physically anyway, I would rather compromise using someone else's server and send through there. |
|
|
|
It's definitely possible. But since OP said "There has to be a simple OS that just works", there are few things i'd like to point.
1. Conflict possibility between DE or default app comes with DE. You might mention you could just remove GNOME, but there's risk you accidentally remove important application or library.
2. I have doubt there won't be any problem when you perform major update (e.g. 20.04 LTS to 22.04 LTS).
Linux Mint fits the bill nicely, for this reason. Yeah this looks good: https://www.linuxmint.com/download_all.phpHas anyone tried Xfce? I've always used this environment, it is the one used by the super lightweight distros, should be the less fancier and thus snappier one. Not sure why they've blocked their page to Tor tho, had to use a proxy on top to get it. Does anyone here recommend some "first thing to do after installing" tips? Something that I always want to be sure is that no temporal stuff is left somewhere. I remember with Elementary OS, it used some sort of temporal backups for unsaved text files for instance, so if you wrote anything you didn't want to keep, and you didn't know this, there would be traces of what you wrote elsewhere. These things are what I really want to keep under control. I want to know that when I delete a file, this file is not saved elsewhere because reasons. This is why I do full disk encryption to begin with, but still, I want to know those things are happening. |
|
|
|
And basically something without privacy unfriendly bloatware (like Ubuntu). Can you give a little bit more context on this? For what bloatware are you talking about? Ubuntu comes with a variety of open-source programs, some of which you can choose to not install during setup. It does provide full disk encryption. Look, it isn't as privacy friendly as Tails or Whonix, but it is friendly in the sense that it doesn't spy on you by default (as in Windows).
When it comes to security, use a reputable distro with large community. That's why I use Ubuntu (and because I've used to it). If your computer doesn't fulfill the resource requirements, consider using the alternative Xubuntu, which requires even less resources. You can also try out Whonix as it comes with Bitcoin Core (and is privacy and security focused): https://www.whonix.org/. You can read up on the whole Canonical-Amazon incident. Basically Canonical (company behind Ubuntu) sent supposedly anonymized telemetry to Amazon. Apparently there's some drama with RedHat as well (Centos). Ubuntu is probably just ok to use, but comes with a lot of stuff that I don't need. Maybe I should just give Debian a try. Apparently it has now become manageable to install. Back then it was a mess but looks like nowadays it installs like a regular OS. Not sure bout the .deb dependencies and so on, but at least I would have a ton of documentation. Whonix im assming is something similar to Tails. I remember Xubuntu and Kubuntu, I may look up what's their current state now. As long as you don't do anything stupid, you shouldn't get hacked, so maybe a hardened OS is overkill, but I will look into Whonix, but like I said, as long as it just installs fine and can do full disk encryption and run the Bitcoin related stuff and not have bloatware etc, and maintain it secure with updates, that should be enough. |
|
|
|
I have been running the same distro for years and now im basically forced to wipe the install and start from scratch because they stopped rolling updates. I was using Elementary OS version 5 and as you can see the Ubuntu release it's based on doesn't do updates anymore. elementary OS Version Released Ubuntu Release Ubuntu Maintenance Updates
0.4 Loki Sep 9, 2016 16.04 LTS April 2021
5 Juno Oct 16, 2018 18.04 LTS April 2023
5.1 Hera Dec 3, 2019 18.04 LTS April 2023
6 Odin Aug 10, 2021 20.04 LTS April 2025
6.1 Jólnir Dec 20, 2021 20.04 LTS April 2025
7.0 Horus Jan 31, 2023 22.04 LTS April 2027I want to ask what people here are using. I want something that is easy to install that has full disk encryption features during the install on the GUI. And basically something without privacy unfriendly bloatware (like Ubuntu). I would also like something that doesn't force you to wipe your stuff and start from scratch every 2 or 3 years. I was looking at n0nce's guide on OpenSUSE. I have never tried that one. Not sure if meets the criteria but having a guide is really nice and would save a lot of time. But there's not much documentation in regards to Bitcoin, most of it is Ubuntu or Debian based. Someone commented this: SUSE is rather painful to get in to in some aspects. I did many custom deployments of OS and post install automatic configuration. Suse frustrated me because they put things in different places compared to most of the other distros, and have an extremely capable and complicated installation control file. Unfortunately, it is not easily created and the documentation is partially missing. To allow users/admins to make use of control files; ALL the possible valid options must be listed in the documentation and this documentation needs to be in a well known or easily found location. It is only AFTER investing considerable time that I came to appreciate the odd and different over-engineered aspects of SUSE. It is very powerful. So I would rather use something more common. I want to be able to search for stuff and find answers. mocacinno has a guide for CentOS, but it hasn't been update in 3 years so probably there's some stuff that changed. Does anyone maintain any other guides for different distros? Im interested in mostly a Bitcoin Core node to form transaction in a desktop install, and a watch-only wallet to broadcast them and check funds, and do this through Tor with a laptop. There has to be a simple OS that just works. But I guess im going to need to go with Ubuntu based ones so that will require full updates every 2 or 3 years when LTS versions run out of updates. And since I use full disk encryption im going to need to reinstall the whole think backing up the wallets and resync. I guess I can do that every few years. In that case I would try the new ElementaryOS but I would like to know what people hereare using, please let me know so I decide what to install. |
|
|
|
|
For those that ask why I don't want a laptop, beside it just not being convenient to carry around, I don't want to look like an high level nerd. You see, the problem is, you never know who you are dealing with, a laptop is typically a place you would store more BTC than a mobile device, where one would expect to carry pocket change, so you want to minimize this risk. Let alone those Coldcard type devices. Those make stand out like someone that is invested into this way too much. If you are a regular fella with a fashionable android phone, it's a much better look than showing up with some fancy, strange device that looks like some sort of Bitcoin-only device.
Im going to look at the Fairphone thing. Im familiar with Purism, their prices are a scam, they get massive cuts for what it is. Im going to also need to know what OS to install in there. Someone mentioned Graphene but this is only for the Google Pixel for some reason, im not buying a Google phone. I have a dated Samsung Galaxy for a phone, does the trick. I don't even know what Android version this uses. Im not familiar with phones.
Btw, what I meant with this thread, wasn't to say, I want to use Bitcoin Core on a phone, I can reasonably compromise, I just want to do it properly. I will mix at home, get the amount to use ready, and put it into mobile Electrum or whatever. Im not going to know the address until I arrive, so I cannot sign it at home. Then I also need to sort out how to transfer this through Tor from the phone. What I don't like is the traces that this would leave in terms of, imagine you lose your phone somewhere or something. Since im not familiar with phones, I don't know what to expect if that happens. Could some experienced phone users comment on this whole process?
|
|
|
|
|
Suppose you only use Bitcoin Core on a Linux distro because you don't trust anything else, and you want to meet with someone in person, and don't do the transaction until you meet, to exchange it for cash at the rate of the physical exchange, or for a product or service. The point is, you want to make the transaction there and can't do it from home. You cannot also carry your laptop.
Is there any handheld device that would make sense to use to do this transaction that doesn't stand out? Like one of these hardware wallets, that screams "punch this guy to get free BTC".
Is there any safe device that looks like a phone that runs Linux or something? I just don't know how one would do this, unless you resort to a regular Android phone. In this case, you are already trusting some flawed hardware and software. I don't need to make a big transaction, so I guess that would be ok, however im concerned from a privacy pov. I would mix the coins at home before transacting with the person using the Android wallet. In this case, what would you do? You need to stream the transaction somehow, so you are going to need internet, and let's say there's no public wifi.. so you are going to need a phone nonetheless.
Maybe having the phone as a router to connect wireless to this handheld device to make the transaction, and broadcast it through the internet data phone connection.. but how do you do this privately?
I don't see how I would do this. I would like how people do this.
|
|
|
|
|
Me gustaria disponer de pequeñas cantidades mensuales en €. Evidentemente, al pagar las comisiones elevadas de un cajero, busco que no tenga KYC. Que opciones hay?
Lo que veo es que el unico sigue siendo shitcoins.club creo. Como es posible? la demanda por cajeros sin KYC seguramente seria rentable para el negocio, pero parece que tienen el monopolio.
En cualquier caso, me gustaria preguntar a alguien que los haya usado. Los problemas de privacidad son evidentes. Como se solventan?
Me refiero a que si visitas su web, los cajeros estan en malls, llenos de camaras, o en locales a pie de calle, que son ridiculamente poco discretos, con logos y carteles de Bitcoin gigantes. Como sabes que no te esta siguiendo nadie a casa despues de salir? En los cajeros en los locales, se advierte que hay una camara, con grabaciones que durara 3 dias y luego seran destruidas, supuestamente. Aun asi, me parece mas fiable, que los encuentros con desconocidos para intercambiar, puesto que no interactuas con nadie directamente, cosa que prefiero evitar. Asi que fuera de estos cajeros, no veo otra forma de disponer de un poco de liquidez en cash. La pregunta es, si es buena idea, o mejor descartarlo, dado los problemas de seguridad y privacidad presentados.
Otras alternativas como HalCash o Bitbase requieren el uso de SMS, con lo cual queda descartado. Y con el de shitcoin.club, sigo viendo el problema de que necesitarias un movil, para hacer la transaccion, y en general un movil por defecto es algo poco seguro y con 0 privacidad. Realmente no veo formas viables de hacerlo. Busco gente con experiencia en España, que consiga obtener liquidez en cash mensual, me gustaria saber como lo hacen.
|
|
|
|
Hello I would like to set up a cold wallet with Bitcoin Core. Here's how I would created the wallet: bitcoin-cli -named createwallet wallet_name="MyWalletName" descriptors=false
So far so good only this warning worries me: {
"name": "MyWalletName",
"warnings": [
"Wallet created successfully. The legacy wallet type is being deprecated and support for creating and opening legacy wallets will be removed in the future."
]
}
I understand that it's all done through hd wallets now. But I can't find any good documentation on how to store and handle this for a cold wallet. What am I backing up there on paper and how do I get it in a simple way? How do I get the private key to an address? Will signing transactions with bitcoin-cli work the same way as with a legacy wallet? I find it all confusing compared to how it used to be. How long will legacy wallets be supported? What disadvantages do I have when I use a legacy wallet as cold wallet? I really only want to use bitcoin-cli (in combination with "bitcoind -noconnect") and the usual Linux tools on my cold wallet machine (Raspberry Pi 2 ). Everything on the terminal. So should I better switch to a hd wallet or can I stay with legacy? Thank you for your attention. tiffy As far as for how long they will be supported: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/20160Always make backups, but if everything fails you can always run an older Bitcoin Core version. A main goal of Bitcoin is to make it as backwards compatible as possible. |
|
|
|
I think you should use the word freeze because lock sounds like you are looking for nLockTime.
The settings will vary depending on the software you are using, but the better wallet, the better privacy options available to you. In addition to what @pooya87 said, activate Coins tab option by going to Wallet >> Coins. Thus, before sending any transaction, you will be able to see all inputs and determine whether Do you want to spend from that address or not?
Note that Electrum is not a privacy wallet, if you are concerned about your privacy, running a full node or through Sparrow would be better.
Yeah, freeze I guess is a more accurate term. Are you talking about Electrum with this? "Wallet >> Coins" Im using Bitcoin Core, which has the very useful Coin Control feature. So all you need to do is not screw up by clicking on the wrong checkboxes. I just want to avoid a Loaded type disaster. They should add big red alarms before you send a transaction if you are mixing your transaction with change addresses. You Don't want to be this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxvd1YOMGxUAnd on a long enough timeline, everyone screws up, so any security measures on this field are welcomed. You'll have to spend change at some point, and at that point, you'll probably want to consolidate outputs. So what do you do? You mix.
Assume you make 500,000 sat change every month. Consolidate outputs you're confident of revealing common ownership, and send them over to a mixing-only Sparrow wallet. From that point on, you can select any of those spent change and use them in several coinjoins. The alternative, probably more expensive approach is to send change to a mixer.
Sparrow creates change from coinjoins, so it doesn't help OP's problem: Okay, here's all the payments that can be tracked from the two new participants of the Whirlpool coinjoin transaction: Entrant 1: bc1q03c0443ausjjdxl2h6ud5m8c0dux0zyg3dqdj7 created 0.00170417 BTC in unmixed change sent to bc1q3fduld0l3r8nclyt5p3r7ak675tekurstn55tl. Since this UTXO is not private, the sats were marked as unspendable and have not been recovered by the wallet owner  Entrant 2: bc1qzc8zku26ej337huw5dlt390cy2r9kgnq7dhtys created 0.00191247 BTC in unmixed change sent to bc1qjlltxr443uy236wl4xhpxlr6dgsu0zltlv3m44. This UTXO was used in a second tx0 transaction, creating a huge trail of transactions that could be traced to each other  The 2nd tx0 transaction created 0.00076348 BTC unmixed change which was sent to bc1qehd7gy8rza9mnzm9wnfjhgw82rp47wmqt7vpgy Since this unmixed change is below the .001 pool minimum, it was consolidated in a 3rd tx0 with 3 other addresses owned by the same wallet:31x8GPqrhzdaxiBJa9N5UisuoxbX1rAnHa 16Gw5WKjbxZmg1zhZQs19Sf61fbV2xGujx 3LZtsJfUjiV5EZkkG1fwGEpTe2QEa7CNeY The 3rd tx0 transaction created .00200317 in unmixed change which was sent to bc1q2p7gdtyahct8rdjs2khwf0sffl64qe896ya2y5 This was spent in a 0.00190000 payment to 3B8cRYc3W5jHeS3pkepwDePUmePBoEwyp1 (a reused address) That payment left .00008553 in change that was tracked to 3Dh7R7xoKMVfLCcAtVDyhJ66se82twyZSn and consolidated with two other inputs in a 4th tx0 transaction: bc1qeuh6sds8exm54yscrupdk03jxphw8qwzdtxgde 3ByChGBFshzGUE5oip8YYVEZDaCP2bcBmZ This 4th tx0 created .00533406 in unmixed change which was sent to bc1qzh699s75smwukg9jcanwnlkmkn38r79ataagd9 which was consolidated with 3 more addresses into a 5th tx0: 3F2qiWQJKQjF7XFjEo8FUYP3AU5AC6RqX8 3HAYYVKUpYbr2ARMdZJr9yVu8xi8UcxtPz 3GQtwwRK31wwCc22q6WS5sCgixUHsG5KaT The 5th tx0 created 0.00058494 BTC in unmixed change that was sent to bc1qvh2zjcwwkj9y70xulla2semvlav3lty0p3l3w3 This was spent in a .00047290 payment to bc1qvzg8jq6wqtr5navn4e3ps4qrkk9r6n4h98gjck That payment left .00008411 in change that was tracked to bc1qg6j0f0wfhpktt2l8uzdn48ct3um2xyur40eyzd and consolidated with another input into a 6th tx0 transaction: 31iZLXWfoywhuMZTPGxTkpzphzh2NXshpP The 6th tx0 created .00753775 in unmixed change that was tracked to bc1qgfll2apc27yct6h2c8r8wq4kqhxjsfrudhhn5q This was spent in a .00737000 payment to bc1q5emzer2t0sq5dez0zsrqgh6scvwn0n24xsladp (a reused address) This payment left 0.00010896 BTC in change which has not been spent yet, but the payment only took place 11 days ago, so I assume it will eventually be spent, allowing the Whirlpool user to be tracked even further. takuma sato, if you want your coins to be untraceable, use the WabiSabi coinjoin protocol with Wasabi Wallet, BTCPay Server, or Trezor. It eliminates the problems of traceable change and common input ownership so every transaction you make is fully private and can never be linked to another transaction you made: https://mempool.space/tx/d465033214fd2309dcce5a90c45fcaa788aa4394ee36debe07aad8d8a37907d2What about this? https://decrypt.co/15435/is-binance-monitoring-withdrawals-to-wasabis-bitcoin-walletLikewise, it’s no surprise that Binance is concerned about withdrawals to Wasabi: analysis by the data analytics firm Chainalysis this week claimed that it could track Wasabi wallet transactions, and linked the alleged PlusToken scammers—a reportedly Chinese ponzi scheme suspected of bilking $2 billion from its victims—to its use. |
|
|
|
I saw this on twitter as made by Robert Kiyosaki and I found the idea laughable. Unfortunately I couldn't get a direct link for the screenshot so am using the information at the top of the image as my source..
........
I smell fear in this statement, fear of the government and it's co-partners about the extent of the financial freedom and privacy bitcoin has without regulatory policies handed over to people. And this freedom is looking like a threat to the government's sit of economic control creating all sorts of lies trying to deceive bitcoiners in giving out their freedom in exchange for a promising bitcoin priceless value.
We know cbdc with their inimical monetary policy control on distribution and issuance. There's no privacy in financial transactions with CDBC individuals financial details are easily accessible at anytime.
In a digital world where privacy is a key challenge having CDBC gain access and saturate the bitcoin market will only mean doom for bitcoin vision.
IMO bitcoin doesn't have to become priceless only when cdbc enters the market, as for me bitcoin is already a priceless asset to my use I don't know about you.
The "priceless" could also mean that it becomes worthless (price-is-less = worth-less). You just have to be careful with their words. But they are free to have CBDC. It won't stop freedom loving people from using Bitcoin. And Bitcoin will continue to increase in price and become more valuable even if a small or tiny fraction of a billion people use it the right way. Those who don't care much about freedom will stick to centralized alternatives or things with the appearance of Bitcoin. I think it's pretty established in english language that priceless in this context means worth a lot, "invaluable". And he's right. CBDCs will for the first time ever make Bitcoin a necessity for anyone that wants any privacy with their money in the first world, specially when they ban physical cash. For now only in third world estates they've had to resort to BTC, and it's still mostly the USD $ that's used there. Once this necessity hits the first world, you can bet the price will go up. However, obtaining BTC may become an obscure thing compared to login in on some exchange. I think BTC will eventually go into being an underground asset, just very valuable instead of the low valuations of the Silk Road days. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
