-snip- I am in the process of finding out what Network they selected.
Your address is bech32 so the pretense that it was " sent to different network" doesn't make sense. That address type is native only in Bitcoin, not used or compatible in any other networks. If it's from someone else's Binance account, you might have to start the process of finding out if he's scamming you instead. |
|
|
|
In Electrum, you'll have to manually broadcast it and even if you save it locally, it wont be automatically sent after the nLocktime passed. Since locktime is being used here just as a proof that it has been used, and not because we want to actually set a specific locktime, then just set a locktime in the past as I suggested above. The transaction will then broadcast normally at the time of signing. If OP wants to prove that he changed the locktime and sets it to some block/date in the future, then there is no proof there that he didn't just create the transaction at that future time and broadcast it immediately. Since it's a " personal contest", that will do. But he can at least set it to the next 1~3 block(s) so that he could 'try' what will happen to the transaction when the locktime doesn't go past yet. |
|
|
|
Yes exactly that one. The api call just returns {enabled: true}, maybe this can be tricked, ill give it a shot. The second api code which contains those info will only appear once you entered the correct 'access code' ( 2fa code). If you type the wrong code, the next 'api code' will only contain " error: "Unable to process request". Probably because they wont give the browser access to the encrypted credentials of the user even thought the correct walletID is provided, unless the 2fa code is provided. |
|
|
|
-snip-
Ah yeah, my bad, but you got it exactly right. I want to control my change addresses manually. I see you can unhook "use change address" in Electrum. I wonder how that looks... Your input gets as output as well together with the withdrawal address? Anyway, if any of you knows the easiest way to put a P2HS as change address from a P2PKH, please let me know. This could be smart to do if you want to transfer your funds to segwit to get lower fees, huh? So you just wait to transfer them till the next time you gonna pay for something else. I know you can do "pay to many" as well in electrum, but that makes the fees higher i guess. It cant be done in the same HD wallet since Electrum can only make one script type per wallet. It can be done by either using " Imported" Electrum wallet with P2SH and P2PKH addresses or Multiple Electrum wallets, one legacy and one P2SH-SegWit ( the legacy and P2SH wallet types cannot be created in the latest version using the standard method). Then use " pay to many" as instructed by ranochigo. For the fee, the trick is to minimize the input ( preferably single input) to minimize the transaction's size, then use the 'Advanced' preview to manually set the absolute fee to 300sat and the locktime as well. Here's a sample transaction that has all of your requirements ( in Testnet), made with Electrum: {
"addresses": [
"mnGWeTPSpDQDaAUberY2yXoUBVKdc929oQ",
"tb1qs7nsd3me4tecjy0dxtvu7fv5j77wtlyyk79g46",
"2NDtnDqpu989KZCFheNLbcyrE3Uhh39Dd37"
],
"block_height": -1,
"block_index": -1,
"confirmations": 0,
"double_spend": false,
"fees": 299,
"hash": "02131283383a61cae96659d17ba8037d1a2eb4fbf63b63a464a1ca9c8b641c28",
"inputs": [
{
"addresses": [
"mnGWeTPSpDQDaAUberY2yXoUBVKdc929oQ"
],
"age": 2131727,
"output_index": 0,
"output_value": 208136,
"prev_hash": "27df12d3196bb002529aaebc8c38c2ff9548965f1226bc863e8de2b76076fda1",
"script": "473044022025c3e1fb29d4771f77b1ed9b9f046c35ab5e92521a0c85a87caf39ff9ded4116022014566644d98f5ec0041dea6af247bb087598b7c2a90aa41f26bc8dec9e4078f9012103bb9863910b98ed804e44535ff8373df729b0d68398634ec70ebabbd399da58db",
"script_type": "pay-to-pubkey-hash",
"sequence": 4294967293
}
],
"lock_time": 1640966421,
"opt_in_rbf": true,
"outputs": [
{
"addresses": [
"tb1qs7nsd3me4tecjy0dxtvu7fv5j77wtlyyk79g46"
],
"script": "001487a706c779aaf38911ed32d9cf259497bce5fc84",
"script_type": "pay-to-witness-pubkey-hash",
"value": 100000
},
{
"addresses": [
"2NDtnDqpu989KZCFheNLbcyrE3Uhh39Dd37"
],
"script": "a914e27cd04be97a13089ba664307599dca4b379a2bb87",
"script_type": "pay-to-script-hash",
"value": 107837
}
],
}: 1.4sat/vB @ 220vB | 299 satoshi Locktime set to 13 days from now / next year (1640966421) P2PKH input: mnGWeTPSpDQDaAUberY2yXoUBVKdc929oQ Sent to P2WPKH: tb1qs7nsd3me4tecjy0dxtvu7fv5j77wtlyyk79g46 P2SH-P2WPKH Change address: 2NDtnDqpu989KZCFheNLbcyrE3Uhh39Dd37 One more question (i probably get more later when i try the transaction):
In case of using locktime, does it have to require two actions? One for locking and one for receiving (broadcasting the transaction) or is it possible to like "auto broadcast" at a specific block/time?
In Electrum, you'll have to manually broadcast it and even if you save it locally, it wont be automatically sent after the nLocktime passed. |
|
|
|
-snip-
AFAIK, they link those funds to the user's KYC data. So after creating a new wallet, the "lost" custodial funds should be recovered after the user passed verification. (I'll try to find the source of this info)
Update: So apparently, I remembered this line from their support page's FAQs: Is my Trading Account backed up?However, they included a step to restore the user's recovery phrase in the recovery guidelines. Your Trading Account is associated with your Blockchain.com identity profile. Anyhow, since the Trading account's funds is custodial, Blockchain is the one who'll have access to it once the user can't recover his credentials. |
|
|
|
If a user loses access to his blockchain wallet account, for example, as a topic starter, what will happen to the funds in this account? Will the blockchain team have access to funds and can they take it for themselves? Or these funds will be lost forever.
The ones stored in their " private key wallets" will be lost forever since no one have access to the seed or the private keys. The wallet stored in their server is encrypted so even if they wanted to, they can't spend it. The funds in the custodial parts of the wallet is recoverable though ( e.g.: Trading wallet), that's even if he lost the walletID, password, seed phrase, etc. That's because the funds is hosted by them. AFAIK, they link those funds to the user's KYC data. So after creating a new wallet, the " lost" custodial funds should be recovered after the user passed verification. (I'll try to find the source of this info) |
|
|
|
|
Is "Use trampoline routing (disable gossip)" setting in Electrum enabled?
It can be found in "Tools->Preferences->'Lightning' tab" of the GUI or the "use_gossip": true, line of the config file.
If that's enabled, you wont be able to connect to any lightning nodes other than the (currently) 3 hardcoded Electrum trampoline nodes.
|
|
|
|
-snip-
3) Send from a P2PKH address (legacy, prefix 1) and set P2HS (prefix 3 address) format.
What do you mean by this? From p2pk then set it as p2sh? In the paragraphs below it, it seems like you meant " ...and set a p2sh change address". Is it? |
|
|
|
Sample addresses:
11....11 0.06 BTC
22....22 0.05 BTC
33....33 0.03 BTC
44....44 0.02 BTC
55....55 0.01.BTC
BTCs to transfer: 0.09 BTC
-snip-
Which algorithm is implemented?
How about an actual test? ( Amounts down by 2 decimal points 'cause I don't have enough testnet coins) Done in "testnet": Here's the coins (UTXO), I've also added a 0.0004 amount. When sending 0.0009 BTC @1sat/vB, it will select "0.0006" and "0.0004" since those are the best candidates to fulfill the will-be-sent amount and the fee.Pretty much your number 2 algorithm.  But as you can see in the replies above and the overwhelming " coinchooser.py" code of Electrum, it's much more complicated that your list. |
|
|
|
So are you telling me I cannot claim my bitcoin SV just with the electrum seed after I download the electrumsv.io wallet? I want to make sure of this before I start the process. I don't want to get stuck and not sure what to do.
The reply above is if you want to check the balance before exporting the keys to another wallet. I already told you in my reply in the first page the steps; it can be claimed as long as the script type is supported by BitcoinSV. Here's some test (mainnet - p2pkh): Electrum wallet's seed: weekend turtle arrange renew proof result notice cliff excite above pluck payment  First and second address: - 1274LZxnj7JmB49sHVaWo3givqpqeLUH9T
- 1DV9jegjr6BGE8KLrSM1bPHnt262DH2gw1
Restore to ElectrumSV:  1st address:  First address and the rest are the same as in Electrum so there should be a balance if you have a fork coin. |
|
|
|
-snip-
So I have to open electrum up then and look at all the addresses btc was in around the time? This is what I don't understand with this.
Must be talking about your original Electrum wallet where your BTC were stored; if it's deleted, you can restore it from seed, cross-check the transaction history and address list, then find a way to get their balances in different chains. eg.: using blockexplorers.
Alternatively, you can create a " watching only" wallet in Electrum clones or other Altcoin wallets to check the balances. For example/guide: - Get and copy your master public key from (BTC) Electrum menu: "Wallet->Information"
- Open ElectrumSV and create a new wallet, name it "watching only".
- Click "Add Account->Import from text" and paste your master public key in the next window.
- After the rest of the set-up, the balance should show-up after syncing (few minutes).
- Addresses with balance is listed in the 'Keys' tab: "View->Show keys" (double-click to display the address/key; your watching only wallet will only display 'public keys').
The watch-only wallet set-up should be similar with other Electrum clones or other wallets, the important step is the export/import of the master public key. (You wont find Electrum users here in the Altcoin board, BTW) |
|
|
|
-snip-
How my various wallet.dat files got mixed up I do not know. I feel there is a security issue here somehow. Its up to the technical guys to evaluate that.
Your screenshots show that your wallets aren't " HD" ( Hierarchical Deterministic) so if you ever made too many transactions after the first backup ( used all addresses up to the last key in the keystore), it will contain outdated list of addresses. Loyce's reply is true except your new addresses wont differ with a password change, it will only happen the first time you encrypted the wallet. AFAIK, they had been recommending to frequently backup your wallet.dat file back when Bitcoin Core's wallet isn't HD. That may be the reason why you got multiple copies of the same wallet. Congrats BTW. |
|
|
|
-snip-
When I do the next address. Should I delete Electrum and reinstall Electrum each time (to avoid the same problem that I had with BitcoinCore).
The root of the problem you had with Bitcoin Core is the " pruning" setting which avoids you to swap wallet.dat files entirely. Plus replacing the file without shutting down Core will result with that seemingly successful ( but improper) import of wallet.dat. Electrum on the other hand is an " SPV" ( Simplified Payment Verification) wallet which doesn't rely on a local copy of the blockchain. Your wallet will only connect to the public servers for balance checking, so you can add keys and get the correct balance without waiting for days/hours nor will encounter the same issue. |
|
|
|
I am having trouble with Send in Bitcoin Core. (I have a separate thread for that but that thread is getting a bit technical now).
-snip-
The error that you got from your " separate thread" isn't about the fee rate. If it's a default fee issue, it should be broadcast without issue but could only stay unconfirmed until it was mined, your transaction wasn't sent to the mempools at all. I made a new reply to that thread and I think the main issue is your way of " replacing" the wallet.dat file so I've posted the " don'ts" of doing it. |
|
|
|
-snip-
Mine is bc1qx8spcg and the receiving one is bc1qn379, the receiving one is not showing any funds in it.
Open the 'Addresses' tab of the " receiving one" ( "View->Show addresses" to enable the tab). Then use 'search' ( CTRL+F) and paste the receiving address to see if it will appear in the address list. If not, you've sent it somewhere else. If it's there, the wallet may not be properly connected to a server. |
|
|
|
With that said, they still recommended 10-characters as the "strong password" in Aug2014.
-snip-I find this quite confusing but assume it’s still the same as back in 2014. If you play with the archived link of blockhain(dot)info from August 2014, you'll see that after typing characters in the 'password', the " password strength" will only show the vulnerabilities of the current password until you've used all character types ( lowercase, uppercase, number, punctuation marks). The constant thing is, it's recommending to use at least 10 characters. In the latest version, it's the same rules as you mentioned. So it's definitely not the same as 2014.Archive: If this is only to find out how many characters you've used to your password, then you'll encounter worse roadblocks afterwards like explained by the reply above. |
|
|
|
17:32:00

bad-txns-inputs-missingorspent (code -25)
Just what I expected, for some reason that transaction is trying to spend an invalid input. It could mean that one or all of your wallet's input(s) is already spent or not available in the blockchain. It could be all/few of the '?' transactions are actually valid but Bitcoin Core still haven't scanned them. Next, I bought a brand new MacBook Air.
Set up Bitcoin Core.
This took about 8-10 days.
Tried replacing the wallet.dat file with the 3 old wallet.dat files I have.
-snip-
So next step.
I did not make any changes to the default Bitcoin Core options.
If you didn't changed any setting including the first launch set-up, then your Bitcoin Core must be pruned, yet you just replaced the wallet.dat and not opened them using the menu " File->Open Wallet". That may have caused the wallet to keep the old status and not properly scanned. In order for things to go smoothly, you'll need to disable pruning to be able to scan/rescan those wallets. Double-check if prune is enabled in the settings: " Settings->Options...->Prune block storage to" If it's 'checked', your blockchain is set to prune and you can't just replace wallet files. To be able to load different wallet files at all times, I'd suggest you to disable it ( that will require you to re-sync from scratch and lots of free disk space). After that, you can now swap, open wallet.dat files whenever you want. But do not just replace the wallet.dat while Bitcoin Core is running, please use the 'open wallet' menu.
But if your Bitcoin Core isn't pruned ( the prune setting is unchecked), try to use rescanblockchain in the console while the correct wallet is selected in the drop-down menu of the console. That will take a few hours to complete and after that, the correct transactions should appear and marked checked in the 'Transactions' tab. |
|
|
|
I think the underlying issue is, your transactions failed to broadcast due to some invalid input(s) or other reasons why a transaction can get rejected by the default relay settings. And you haven't responded to my previous replies about 'test to manually broadcast the newly created " not in mempool" transaction to your mempool': You can also try to manually broadcast it and see what mempool-related error you'll get. Quoting myself: - In the transactions tab, right-click on one of the transactions, then select: "Copy raw transaction"
- Open the console (Window->Console), then type: sendrawtransaction "Your_Copied_RAW_Transaction"
- And it should return with an error which should be the reason why those aren't successfully sent.
Alternatively, if you want to send them no more: use testmempoolaccept instead. e.g.: testmempoolaccept '["Your_Copied_RAW_Transaction"]' The " raw transaction" that you need to copy is the recently created " not in mempool" transaction. I'd recommend testmempoolaccept this time. The error message should be the best indicator of the issue. BTW, none of your screenshots show the sync status ( the check at the lower-right corner of Bitcoin Core). The wallet may not be scanned correctly and those " send transactions" may reappear after a rescan. |
|
|
|
(I've made some edits to your image)Looks like only those four inbound transactions are successfully verified, the others had issues ( indicated by the '?' logo). If those are all invalid, then your final balance will be 0.5 BTC. You can try to abandon those invalid transactions before creating a new transaction but make sure that the wallet was scanned properly when you loaded it. Or else, it might try to spend a already spent input(s), and also to display to correct balance and transactions. Make sure that your wallet has a backup before doing this: - Use "Right-click->Abandon Transaction" to those boxed transactions.
- Then make a new transaction.
|
|
|
|
-snip-
Is there somewhere a statistic chart showing this for the last months?
I see that you've moved this specific question from your other topic into its own thread. I already got an answer in that thread, I'll quote it here if you missed it: -snip- you can select another slider option in the drop-down menu of the 'send' dialogue box: From 'ETA', 'mempool' and 'static'; - ETA: the default with most accurate estimate (but most of the time over-estimates)
- mempool: for advanced users who can understand how mempool works; usually, it's "1~0.5 MB from tip" as the 'express' fee rate.
- static: the basic slider with pre-configured values from 1~300sat/vByte.
The absolute fee is displayed above as " Mining fee", but the prioritization is based from the " fee rate" ( slider).
Why do you have to calculate and research just to send a transaction with " necessary transaction fee"? Your wallet already got that covered so you don't have to go to web for statistics and calculate in order to find the optimal fee. Amongst the options, I'd suggest you to use " mempool" and use 1~0.5mb from tip ( displayed when you hover-over the slider). Personally, my technique is: Open the 'Advanced' tab, set the fee rate slider to '1mb from tip', then edit the absolute fee by a few satoshi higher so it'll be just below the tip. Overall, no can can really estimate if the next block will be mined quickly after you broadcast the transaction, the mempools can grow in size during that time making your " optimal fee rate" drop out of the priority. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
