1. My passphrase is all lowercase or all uppercase. If it's all lowercase, then possibly, the first letter of the passphrase OR first letter of each word is proper case. It would have been a pain to do that on the Ledger though so I am hoping it's all lower or upper case. Is there any way to run only those combinations, or do I need to try each casetype as a separate run? Separate runs. There is no straightforward way to tell it to change the case of your entire token file. You can put multiple tokens on a single line, and it will only try one from each line, such as: Token token TOKEN
Code code CODE However, there is no way to say "If you pick the lowercase token from the first line, pick the lowercase token from all the other lines too". So you will simply have to make a token file with everything in lowercase, and once exhausted change everything to uppercase, and so on. 2. I'm relatively confident there are certain words, and even the order, and use + in front of those. The other words are in the middle but I'm not certain how the "relative anchor" works. If you are certain a word appears somewhere, but you don't know where, then use + If you know the exact position of a word, for example "This is definitely the fourth word", then use + ^4^ If you have three words you think WordA comes first, WordB somewhere later, and WordC later still, then you would use something like this: + ^r1^WordA
+ ^r2^WordB
+ ^r3^WordC This fixes these word positions relative to each other. WordB will never be tried before WordA, but there could still be other words between WordA and WordB. If you have three words and you know they are consecutive, then combine them in to a single line like this: The %s will be replaced by a single space. 3. Complicating things more, I may have replaced a's with @, s with $ etc. I have the custom-typos map but that becomes way too many combinations. I think I did it only for the first a or s in a word and not all. I.e., Emb@rra$s Combine these on the same line to try only one of them at a time. Example: Embarrass Emb@rrass Embarra$s Emb@rra$s |
|
|
|
|
It sounds very much like both the wallet file and the seed phrase you have are in no way connected to the addresses you have been withdrawing bitcoin to.
In addition to the advice above regarding searching for other wallet files on your computer, do you have any other seed phrases or back ups you could try? And are you certain you never used a passphrase? You might have added one while mistakenly believing you were simply adding a password to your wallet file.
Where did you even copy the addresses to withdraw to in the first place, because it doesn't seem like they came from this wallet.
|
|
|
|
-snip- Oh right, haha. You were talking about the transaction fee in order for the NFL team to buy the bitcoin in the first place. I thought you were talking about the network transaction fee, which will obviously just be a few cents regardless of how much bitcoin is being transferred. Any entity buying such large amounts of bitcoin will be doing it via some OTC desk and will be able to both shop around and also negotiate an acceptable fee. As an indication, Phemex OTC has fees of 0.08% for orders over $500,000: https://phemex.com/otc/legend-trading |
|
|
|
Is it fair to say it's all out of thin air over 14 years between 2008 and 2022? Some of it surely is, but the economy is also growing because huge new businesses appear, creating new jobs, new demand and offer, so since the charts are for the total assets, I think at least some of that printing has something reasonable justifying it. Economic growth does not show up on the Fed's balance sheet. The balance sheet was essentially static between 2002 and 2007, despite all those years having good economic growth, with 2004 being as high as 4%. Everything on the balance sheet represents new money being printed by the Fed. I agree that the US is playing with fire and has been doing so for a while, but sometimes it's hard to make a better choice than printing when you really need funds to fix something now and deal with the consequences later. That's party of the problem. Politicians don't want to make the hard decisions now, because it will cost them elections. Better to make the easy decisions and kick the can down the road endlessly. That's why we are constantly printing money, why our deficit is constantly increasing, and why we have to constantly increase the debt ceiling. The debt is over $30 trillion and continuing to increase quickly. We are having to borrow more just to keep up with interest payments. How high can it get before the whole thing collapses? And all the while, the average person just gets poorer and poorer. if the government is willing to let tens of thousands of illegal immigrants come into the country and take up resources then I don't know what to say. The amount spent on illegal immigrants is absolutely dwarfed by the amount we spend on the military or our broken healthcare system. We spend 18% of GDP on healthcare - most of Europe spends around 11-12%. |
|
|
|
More than 90% of the people in the USA would most likely never buy/adopt Bitcoin. Never is strong word. Even after the Fed print another $10 trillion, $50 trillion, $100 trillion? What about when inflation hits 30%, 50%, 100%+? What about a loaf of bread costs $50? This is what is happening in countries like Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Argentina, Turkey. The US is not immune to such things, especially when the Fed continues to print money with abandon. Everyone will reach a breaking point eventually when they lose faith in fiat. As much as some are surprised that the US government stood behind all deposits in all banks as a guarantee, I wonder if they had any other choice at all? FDIC insurance has $128 billion in assets. The deposits less than $250,000 that they insure total $23.7 trillion. This means that 99.5% of deposits are uncovered. What happens when a couple more banks go under and the FDIC can't cover them? You guessed it! Money printer goes brrrrr! Next on the list of banks needing a bailout:  |
|
|
|
Instead of telling them what to do, show them how it's done the right way. Why not fork the coordinator and have it accept all transactions. Because as I've shown above, the Wasabi wallet software itself is deeply flawed and reuses addresses on both sides of coinjoin transactions. Why fork flawed software in order to launch your own coordinator to bypass the anti-fungibility and anti-privacy ethos of Wasabi/zkSNACKs, when I can just use JoinMarket or Samourai with my own node which avoid all these issues in the first place. |
|
|
|
Yes OK, thanks for clarifying... the wallet with passphrase is independent... still accessible even if the wallet without passphrase is recovered/stolen. This is correct, but also dependent on your passphrased wallet having a strong enough passphrase. Let's say an attacker steals your seed phrase and empties that wallet. You have an additional hidden wallet which uses this seed phrase along with a weak passphrase. You passphrase might be a single word, or just a couple of characters, or something related to you personally such as your name or birthday or whatever. An attacker could either guess your passphrase or simply bruteforce it. There is plenty of software which will allow an attacker to attempt millions of possible passphrases a second and check the corresponding wallets for funds. For that reason, you should ensure any passphrase you do use is strong enough to protect your wallet on its own, in the event that your seed phrase is compromised. This usually means either a long and random string of characters and symbols as might be generated by a good password manager, or a further string of words not dissimilar to your seed phrase itself. Your passphrase should also obviously be backed up on paper separately to your seed phrase. And as soon as an attacker has your seed phrase, you should consider your passphrased wallets at risk, and move all the coins within to a new seed phrase +/- passphrase. |
|
|
|
Hence the importance of distributing your coins across several addresses and discarding an address after the first transaction Not reusing an address? Sure. Discarding an address? Nope. I still have copies of every private key for every address I've ever used, even ones which I used once years ago and have never and will never use again. Why discard them? The files/back ups already exist so it takes no effort on my part to keep them, and there is always the chance that I accidentally reuse an address or a third party accidentally pays me to an old address, at which point those coins would be lost forever had I discarded those keys. In the words of Satoshi: Sigh... why delete a wallet instead of moving it aside and keeping the old copy just in case? You should never delete a wallet. |
|
|
|
i remember some NFL news that some team was paying players in BTC. i bet the team pays the transaction fee to put it in their wallet too. A quick search shows that NFL players are on anywhere between $1 and $50 million a year. I'm pretty sure the teams would throw in the 50 cent transaction fee as well.  they don't have any services that let you pay your usd bills using bitcoin? i guess even if those existed, they are centralized services and thus no more trustworthy than the bill pay at your local bank. There are such a services, but I've never used them. They unanimously require a level of KYC I am not willing to provide. If I desperately need to pay some bill using bitcoin, then I'll simply trade my bitcoin privately peer to peer as I usually do and then use the fiat to pay the bill. yeah the funny thing is that at least in this particular instance, the us government stepped in and bailed out people that had usdc and might have lost it. Ridiculous. I take major issue with tax dollars being used and new money being printed to bail out banks which collapse because of their own greed and risky gambling, which I've just started a topic about an hour ago. Doing the same thing for centralized scamcoins, even indirectly such as in this case, is utterly ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Honestly, they've printed so much money out of thin air that I've simply lost count. The big surge in money printing at the start of COVID was the fourth round of so called quantitative easing since 2008. I'm not sure if the ongoing money printing up until April of 2022 was just extended QE4 or if that counted as QE5. So I guess we are on the brink of either QE5 or QE6. Anyway, let's take a look at the Fed's balance sheet:  2008 - 0.8 trillion dollars. 2022 - 9 trillion dollars. 8.2 trillion dollars just created out of thin air in 14 years. To put that in to perspective, with population of ~334 million, that's $24,500 of new money for every single person in the US. That's $8.2 trillion driving up inflation, devaluing the dollar, making your savings worth less, making your money buy less, making you poorer. Don't worry, though. They'll reverse all this printing, they say. They started at the end of 2018, and managed to take a measly $0.5 trillion off before they started printing again to astronomical new levels. Don't worry, though. They'll reverse that too. They started a year ago, and have managed to take $0.6 trillion off it this time!  But wait, let's zoom in on the last few months of the graph I shared above:  $0.3 trillion new money in a week. It took them a year to take off $0.6 trillion, and they've undone half of that progress in a week. Guess it's back to normal proceedings of money printer goes brrrrr! Can't have the banks losing money now, can we! The banks must be protected at all costs. Fuck 99% of the population who are being made poorer and poorer on a daily basis. As long as the banks get endless bailouts! Here's a quote I made almost 3 years ago: If it took them 11 years to start reducing their balance sheet following the 2008 crash, how much longer do you think it will take following this crash? Not to mention they probably aren't even finished printing for this crash yet. There will be another crisis, and another, and another, all before they even begin to undo these changes, let alone get their balance sheet back down to "normal" levels. The printing will never end. The dollar value will never stop falling. This isn't temporary - this is normal.
This is the new normal. Money printer goes brrrrr. Fiat is a scam. Bitcoin fixes this. |
|
|
|
I opened 2 subsequent wallets from the original after all this started (electrum wallet 1 and electrum wallet 2 from the main wallet) but haven't been able to do anything with them either. I've done all the suggestions on those wallets and get the same results. They show all the same info as the main wallet. The options are you have the right wallet but you need to extend the gap limit as per nc50lc's instructions, you have the right seed phrase but are recovering the wrong wallet either via the wrong derivation path or a missing passphrase, you have the wrong seed phrase altogether, or your coins have been moved/stolen. Can you try to answer each of the following questions to help us narrow this down: So am I correct in saying that your original wallet file, and the wallet file you recovered from your seed phrase, are identical, containing the same addresses? Do you have any other wallet files or seed phrases? Do you remember ever setting an additional passphrase or extending your seed phrase with custom words? Does your wallet show any transaction history - i.e. coins have come in and gone out, or is it just completely blank? And what about the addresses which currently hold your coins? You are absolutely certain that your coins haven't been moved? You say these addresses which hold your coins came from an Electrum wallet - are you sure it was this wallet? And you are sure you saw them show up in your Electrum wallet whenever you initially received them? What character to these addresses start with? When you restored your wallet from the seed phrase, on the screen where you type in you seed phrase but before you click next it should have said something like "Seed Type: XXX" or "BIP39". What does yours say? |
|
|
|
And hey. What happened to the party, boys? I assume they all drunk themselves in to unconsciousness. Which is a shame, I was just getting lubed warmed up! |
|
|
|
Was advised on another forum I need to open a different wallet in order to "bridge" the two wallets and transfer funds from electrum to new wallet. Do not do this! There is absolutely no need to send your coins to somewhere else. And how would they expect you to make that transfer if you cannot access your coins in the first place? The BITREF site and Blockchain.com shows the coins are still in the wallet address I own. So in that case your coins are perfectly safe and you haven't been hacked, there is just some local problem with your Electrum software which we need to fix. When you open the original wallet or the wallet file you restored from your seed phrase, click on the "Addresses" tab. (Click View -> Show Addresses in the toolbar if you don't see the addresses tab). Do you see the addresses you expect to see, the ones you were looking up on blockchain.com? You've already said that the circle is green - try clicking on the green circle and then right clicking on a new server and selecting "Use as server" to rule out a problem with the server you are connecting to. |
|
|
|
Yawn. Since I've linked to my post where I point out definitive proof of Wasabi's address reuse twice, and you've ignored it both times, I'll just quote it here for anyone else reading this thread to look in to themselves. Even Bitcoin Core devs are aware of this: https://nitter.it/1440000bytes/status/1611713687123030017But good job of sticking to the party line of just outright denying it and gaslighting anyone who points it out. |
|
|
|
-snip- I'll assume the reason you are ignoring my points yet again is because I am right and you have no satisfactory answer. If you use Wasabi, then the only coordinator with any volume is the coordinator which is run by the same people, and is anti-privacy and pro-censorship. They are rejecting a source of good revenue by blocking those transactions. They are protecting their revenue by implementing blacklists, not reducing it. If they are unable to run a censorship-free coordinator, then the correct thing to do would be to shut down their centralized coordinator and work towards setting up decentralized ones. Instead they opted to sacrifice their users' privacy, enforce the nonsense that is "taint", and attack bitcoin itself, in order to protect their own income stream. I'm asking you what your concern is regarding Wasabi since Wasabi is specifically designed to defeat chain analysis businesses Wasabi is specifically designed to defeat chain analysis businesses, and we do that by sending your money directly to them to pay for their services. Lmfao. Your keys, your coins, you decide how to spend them, and there's nothing anyone else can do to stop you unless they have more than 51% of the Bitcoin network hashpower. Or you use Wasabi, and then we will stop you coinjoining them because our blockchain analysis buddies spied on you on our behalf and told us that you are very naughty!
It is abundantly clear that you are part of Wasabi's team, and you have no desire to actually address our arguments but rather just repeat the same old nonsense talking points which have been thoroughly debunked on here, Twitter, Reddit, etc., many times. Wasabi/zkSNACKs is pro-censorship, anti-fungibility, and anti-privacy. |
|
|
|
Think of it this way, your unused address is like a buried treasure, when you use it and send back the change to the same address is like digging the treasure out taking some coins from it and burying it again, now if anyone passes through and sees the fresh soil, they could dig and find it, unless you bury it so deep that digging it out could take years and so much energy. This is a misleading analogy. With current technology, no amount of time is sufficient to turn a public key in to a corresponding private key. It is perfectly safe to reveal your public key (and indeed, every used address has done exactly this), and it is not analogous to revealing the location of your treasure. because each time transaction was made, it's possible that your public key was revealed and could be publicly seen by anyone in the blockchain. It's not just possible - it's a necessity. You must reveal the public key as part of the signature. Without doing so, you cannot spend those coins. That time, the address that you've used can be tracked and traced and it could be your wallet address is vulnerable to hacking or it could be at risk. This is not accurate. The address you have used is revealed on the blockchain the instant you first receive coins to it. And revealing the public key does not put that address at risk of being hacked. I don't understand why only a public key that starts with 04 is shown Uncompressed public keys start with 04. Compressed public keys, which almost all software now uses, start with either 02 or 03. Perhaps the issue is this: to send bitcoins from an address, you must reveal its private key. You've made a typo here. |
|
|
|
The answers above are all right, but maybe this is an XY problem? What are you trying to achieve with such a device? Using it to try to find a random address collision is pointless. Even a device which is trillions of times faster than current GPUs will fail to find a single collision before the death of the planet. Or are you just desperate for a really unique looking vanity address? |
|
|
|
|
The first thing I would do before trying anything else would be to make a couple of back ups of your wallet.aes.json file.
So you can log in to your blockchain.com account by resetting the password via email? Does your account show your coins?
If not, then as above, your only option will be to break the password for your wallet file. I would also suggest using btcrecover to do this. If, as you say, there are 10-20 possible passwords, then this will be very easy to do. If those passwords don't work, then you'll need to create a tokens file to try variations on those passwords to try to brute force the real password. We can talk you through how to do that if it comes to that.
|
|
|
|
This is vague, can you explain to me what your concern is, exactly? That blockchain analysis companies buy datasets from data brokers which contain literally thousands of data points about a single person, and then use blockchain analysis in order to deanonymize your UTXO in any way they can and then directly link that UTXO to your identity. This is what you are directly funding. Again, you are completely wrong: You can use ANY coordinator with Wasabi Wallet, there is no requirement to use the zkSNACKS coordinator. I already acknowledged you can use a different coordinator. But as I pointed out above and you ignored (please correct me if I'm wrong - I have no desire to download software which is going to spy on me to check), there are no alternative coordinators with any meaningful volume. And why would anyone waste time launching such a coordinator on software which links mixed outputs with toxic unmixed change outputs? Everyone who is serious about privacy has already stopped using Wasabi. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
