I have an older wallet which does not have a 12 word master seed, but does have a 15 word password. I lost my pin to the original installation.
15 word password? I'm confused... is this a 15 word seed mnemonic (if so, where did it come from? blockchain.com?) or just a password that you used for accessing the wallet file?  If you don't have the "12 word seed", then you will be unable to recover your HD wallet as your HD wallet (and all the "accounts") is derived from a seed which is derived from the 12 word mnemonic. The "Single Address" account is completely unrelated and of no use to recovering your HD wallet... How do I recover my btc?
You need the 12 word seed mnemonic... (or the PIN and your original installation.)  |
|
|
|
And it's a bit of a "swing and a miss" with regards to the full node support...  I don't use RPC user/password... I use the .cookie file authentication method, so the user/pass changes every time the node is restarted.  |
|
|
|
LE: However, what BTC Nitro does, it rebroadcast your transaction across a number of global Bitcoin ‘nodes’ which reduces the time you wait for miners to become aware of your transaction and start processing it. This is how our BTC accelerator works. That's not an accelerator, it does nothing to actually confirm the transactions. Yeah.. exactly! It's a very misleading explanation by the website... they don't accelerate anything... nor does "rebroadcasting" have any real effect on when your transaction will be confirmed. Saying they do this to "accelerate" your transaction is simply bullshit. My guess would be they're just trying to attract attention for ad revenue. |
|
|
|
Yeah... OP seems to be doing this backwards and needs to re-read BIP39: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawikiSpecifically the " Generating the mnemonic" section... it explains pretty clearly how it works. You don't start with 11 words and then "bruteforce" the 12th word (7 bits entropy + 4 bit checksum). As per the BIP: First, an initial entropy of ENT bits is generated
noting that ENT is defined as: The mnemonic must encode entropy in a multiple of 32 bits. With more entropy security is improved but the sentence length increases. We refer to the initial entropy length as ENT. The allowed size of ENT is 128-256 bits.
So, we need ENT value between 128bits and 256bits, in a multiple of 32... in OPs case, we need 128 bits of ENT (for 12 words). Unfortunately, the OP only generated 121 bits: 1010100010011110110001001110100000110010011101010111011101000001000110100001000001001111101111101100101110111111011010101
You CANNOT get from here to a valid 12 word seed... you're missing 7 bits... so use your dice and get another 7 bits and get to a total of 128 bits first before you concern yourself with the checksum!!
OK, so for illustration purposes, lets say that the OP went ahead and generated the other 7 bits required... and ended up with 128 bits like so: 10101000100111101100010011101000001100100111010101110111010000010001101000010000010011111011111011001011101111110110101011101100
Now, following the BIP: A checksum is generated by taking the first ENT / 32 bits of its SHA256 hash.
So, we SHA256 our ENT... in this instance, we'll convert our binary to hex: 10101000100111101100010011101000001100100111010101110111010000010001101000010000010011111011111011001011101111110110101011101100
===> A89EC4E8327577411A104FBECBBF6AEC
Then we SHA256 that ( https://emn178.github.io/online-tools/sha256.html - Set the input type to HEX): cfbcc91db0c32831574d52049530de257354baee4ac768bae401ae330cfba4a8
Then we convert that HEX result back to binary: cfbcc91db0c32831574d52049530de257354baee4ac768bae401ae330cfba4a8
=====> 1100111110111100110010010001110110110000110000110010100000110001010101110100110101010010000001001001010100110000110111100010010101110011010101001011101011101110010010101100011101101000101110101110010000000001101011100011001100001100111110111010010010101000
We need the first ENT / 32 bits... 128 / 32 = 4... so we want 4 bits... == 1100 We add that to our original 128 bits: 101010001001111011000100111010000011001001110101011101110100000100011010000100000100111110111110110010111011111101101010111011001100
Then divide into twelve 11 bit chunks to derive our words: 10101000100
11110110001
00111010000
01100100111
01010111011
10100000100
01101000010
00001001111
10111110110
01011101111
11011010101
11011001100
The twelfth word is 11011001100 = 1740 = sunset
So our final derived 12 word mnemonic is: possible wage deliver gossip first party hair antique salute fuel survey sunset
We can confirm this by using Ian Coleman's Mnemonic Convertor: https://iancoleman.io/bip39/First, paste in the 12 words into the BIP39 Mnemonic box, and then tick the box that says "Show Entropy Details":  You can see the calculated entropy, and the binary checksum etc. |
|
|
|
Coinjoin transaction Validated? Where exactly are you seeing the status "validating"? I'm not sure exactly what it is that you're having issues with... Are you able to provide a screenshot of the Wasabi UI that shows the issue? |
|
|
|
Firstly, most "Transaction Accelerators" are simply scams... especially the random website ones that say things like "we work with a number of mining pools" etc... and especially if they ask for a small fee to "accelerate" your transaction. Most of the time, they don't actually do anything except take your money and then claim that it could take 24 hours for your transaction to be confirmed (which is usually quite likely for any transaction)... other times they'll just use the "free" services available that do actually work. As for why free accelerators (like the ViaBTC one) actually work without a fee... well, essentially that is just a mining pool giving priority to your transaction, regardless of the fee that you've paid. Mining Pool operators are free to include any transactions they choose. The ones that offer accelerators simply override their automatic transaction selection algorithms and say "include all these 'accelerated' transactions first, then fill the block with high fee paying transactions as per normal". ViaBTC originally did it as a bit of good PR... they earned a name for themselves by trying to help people out. Which accelerator did you use? and aside from the fact that your transaction finally got confirmed, what proof do you have that the accelerator actually did anything at all? As far as I'm aware, the only free one that actually works with any level of consistency is ViaBTC, but that's hard to get one of the 100 free slots... |
|
|
|
If the search for the 0204010120 hex code is successful, then it sounds like your original wallet.dat was unencrypted. This also seems likely as PyWallet is finding "unencrypted" keys. That is good, as it makes it a lot easier to recover, as all you need to do is take all the 130 "unencrypted keys" from PyWallet and import them into the wallet of your choice. How did you go about converting the 64 bit HEX into an address? Are you able to use the dumpwallet option in PyWallet? Does that output all the keys/addresses? |
|
|
|
I tried accelerating one of the transactions with ViaBTC and it did nothing. Never tried Antpool, though. Is that a free accelerator?
ViaBTC still works as far as I know, but is heavily oversubscribed and difficult to get accepted... like you need to submit within the first second of a new hour, and even then it's not guaranteed you'll beat the bots  Also, their broken system still calculates your fee using sats/byte... not sats/ vbyte... So, if you've used a SegWit transaction, it's possible that your 10 sats/vbyte fee won't meet their 10 sats/byte minimum fee requirement. I've actually tested this with a transaction that I was sending a few months ago... I had sent with a 10 sats/vbyte fee, but their system said that my fee was too low (recorded it as ~6 sats/byte). As for Antpool, as far as I'm aware, that one has not worked for years. From memory, someone published the details here and on reddit etc (it wasn't well publicised at the time and was a "hidden" service) and then it would appear that it got flooded to the point that Antpool just quietly stopped using it... the page is still accessible (if you know the URL), and it'll still say "transaction accelerated" etc when you submit a transaction... but the transaction will never get mined (by AntPool) prior to it being at the "correct" fee level |
|
|
|
The new wallet I made, using my seed to recover, shows as no funds in it.
Then, unfortunately, it would appear that you do not have the correct seed mnemonic written down. Recovering from the seed should generate an identical wallet (including all the addresses and funds). If you don't see the same addresses and wallet history, then you don't have the correct seed mnemonic I can still access my original wallet (the one with the funds in) and can see the funds.
That wallet is effectively useless to you unless you have the 2FA code to match it... without your old device that has the 2FA code setup, you're a bit stuck. With Electrum 2FA wallets, to be able to spend (or recover) coins you need either: 1. 2FA wallet file + wallet password (if any) + 2FA code from authenticator app or 2. The (correct) seed mnemonic You don't appear to have either of these things  At this point, your best only option is to email TrustedCoin from the same email address that was originally used when creating the 2FA wallet. If you are able to provide sufficient proof of ownership, they may be able to reset the 2FA code (or provide the old secret key) for you. |
|
|
|
I've been reading this thread and it's unclear if you've actually used the option "Cancel (double-spend)" on the one with the wrong receiving address.
Same here... This is what is confusing me: i need help so basiclly i payed to a wrong adress and cancel it with a new payment same amount of btc but higher fee to my address
How exactly did you "cancel" this wrong address payment? Which one of these options did you do: 1. Did you just goto "send" and try sending coins somewhere else? 2. Did you use coin control to attempt to spend exactly the same UTXOs as spent in the wrong address payment? 3. Did you use the "cancel (double-spend)" option on the wrong address payment? Without knowing exactly what you did to start with, it's going to be difficult to figure out how to fix it (if indeed it is still fixable)... |
|
|
|
I just had a weird experience with the Electrum mobile wallet as well... The default_wallet had the same "password" as my mobile device PIN? ... which I don't remember setting... as I only use the mobile app for "testing" and all the test wallets have the same password set. After changing the wallet password back to the "standard" one that I use, I'm unable to replicate this issue... even after setting/unsetting the PIN code feature several times. I can only assume that I had actually set the password to be the PIN at some point? Although I'm not sure why I would have done this... |
|
|
|
|
I concur, do not dispose of this wallet... it's entirely possible that the value of Bitcoin will increase to such a level that even 0.1 BTC will be so valuable that the costs involved in bruteforcing your BIP38 password will be outweighed by the value of the recovered coins.
Bruteforcing "scrypt" is slow today... but that may change in the coming years.
|
|
|
|
What about the credit card-looking BITHD Razor? It is open-source, but it has somehow gone under the radar. I remember reading several reviews about this particular device and some of their other products on the forum.
I know this HW because several members got a chance to test it for free, and they wrote their review. Furthermore, I think that at that time the biggest drawback was the price around $150 (now $99.99+shipping) which was a bit too expensive compared to the competition, and the fact that it is a card type HW, but crypto users do not prefer to carry these devices with them (mostly). In my opinion, another disadvantage is that this device only supports Android/iOS and does not work on desktop computers. Personally, this was the biggest issue, that it was Android/iOS only... I do most (if not all) of my crypto related activity using a desktop/laptop computer... not on my mobile device. Also, you were kind of "locked" into their "BitPie" wallet, which I don't really like. It also comes with a custom USB power connector due to the form factor of the device precluding it from using a standard micro or USB C connector. Pricewise, it was probably a bit expensive on release, the current price (~US$99) is probably "OK"... Otherwise, the device was actually pretty neat and worked OK. I didn't have any issues with it. Having said that, I'd probably still go with either Ledger or Trezor if I were buying a new hardware wallet today. IMO, they still offer the best combination of price/feautres... If money wasn't an issue, I'd probably try a coldcard. |
|
|
|
Can’t I recreate the private key from a new device?
No, each openDime device has it's own unique, random private key. Unless you can find that device, your money is gone. |
|
|
|
There is no real guarantee with how long it is going to take, even "after doing all the increased transaction fees"... there are simply too many variables For instance, if the "best" fee is currently 100 sats/vbyte... and even if you send with 120... you could still end up waiting for a long time if no blocks are mined for an hour... and 10000 more transactions are added that all send with fees higher than 120 etc. All you are doing by increasing the fee, is increasing the odds that your transaction will be included in a block in the near future... but it will likely never be 100% guaranteed. There are currently nearly 100,000 unconfirmed transactions... about 70-75 blocks worth... this new bull run has flooded the network with transactions |
|
|
|
... and I'll be sure not to repeat the same mistakes, for sure.
The tricky part will be identifying exactly where it went wrong and how your wallet was compromised so that you don't repeat the same mistakes... Unless you figure out the "how" part of this unfortunate incident, and then take the necessary steps to prevent that from happening, you could well lose more coins in the future |
|
|
|
In Armory settings (GUI) I was able to point to the bitcoin blocks database on the external drive.
According to your logfile... Armory is still looking in the default directory (/home/bob/.bitcoin/) for the bitcoin blocks: 2020-12-17 20:28:26 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:268 - setSatoshiDir: directory does not exist: /home/bob/.bitcoin
2020-12-17 20:28:26 (WARNING) -- SDM.py:402 - Spawning DB with command: ArmoryDB --db-type="DB_FULL" --cookie --satoshi-port=8333 --datadir="/media/bob/Backup Plus/Armory" --dbdir="/media/bob/Backup Plus/Armory/databases"
2020-12-17 20:28:26 (INFO) -- ArmoryUtils.py:689 - Executing popen: ['ArmoryDB', '--db-type="DB_FULL"', '--cookie', '--satoshi-port=8333', '--datadir="/media/bob/Backup Plus/Armory"', '--dbdir="/media/bob/Backup Plus/Armory/databases"']
2020-12-17 20:28:26 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:1824 - Connecting on port 9001
2020-12-17 20:28:26 (INFO) -- ArmoryQt.py:1923 - Setting netmode: 1
2020-12-17 20:28:26 (ERROR) -- BDM.py:197 - DB error: /home/bob/.bitcoin/blocks is not a valid path
where did you copy that logfile from? Given you're running Armory using --datadir="/media/bob/Backup Plus/Armory", did you copy the logfile from that directory? |
|
|
|
Never seen that GTK Error before either... if that is still showing when you try the NOASM version, then there might be an issue with the Ubuntu install (missing libraries? ) |
|
|
|
im new here - is it against the rules to send/post btc adresses here on the forum?
No, it's not against the rules to post BTC addresses... but depending on your personal level of "paranoia", it's advisable to consider what you do and don't share from a privacy point of view  Note that "begging" (ie. asking for people to send you money) is against the forum rules... so posting an address and saying "please send me money" would be against the rules. Refer "Rule 7" in the "Unofficial Forum Rules": https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=703657.0 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
