That's the individual "column" files... which aren't exactly CSV [1], as they're really just a single column of data... and that's an "End Of Line" separator issue.  It shows up fine in Notepad++... but by displaying the "hidden" whitespace, we can see it only has LF or "Line Feed" characters for "End of Line"... this is a Unix/Linux standard. However, Windows (and notepad.exe) uses "CR LF"... aka "Carriage Return, Line Feed". Hence, the file not displaying correctly in notepad.exe Here is how it looks after importing it to excel and exporting it as .csv
I suspect that Excel simply changed the EOL to CRLF so that it shows "correctly" in notepad.exe [1] - Technically, they are valid according to csv specs |
|
|
|
What will happen when the network rate congests too badly though? I mean, I even sent a transaction with a fee of over 120 sats/vbyte but it got confirmed after 14 hours of long wait. Isn't that something weird? I mean, how can miners just relay high-fee blocks only and leave the lower ones and clog the network intentionally? Is it because the price spike of BTC? But that should rather trigger the fee to go down, no?
Simple reason is because miners are not a charity and want to make money... and blocks have a finite amount of space... and miners have no real control over the time taken to find a valid block, due to the "luck" factor. It's basic "supply and demand". If the total size of "waiting" transactions >= max block size, then transactions with highest fee rates get priority... if new transactions are created at a rate higher than that at which transactions are being added into blocks, then the size of waiting transactions will easily outgrow the block size... and waits become longer. Then people start increasing the fee rates being paid and then those transactions with the lower fee rates get left behind as miners prioritise the higher fee rate transactions to maximise the returns from their mining. |
|
|
|
I'm not using seed. I've just packed some thousands of addresses plus their private keys. Honestly, I'm not using seeds for one reason. I have not understood how they work (and I find them pretty less secure). Hence, I'm not touching them.
I'm not sure why you consider one "very large randomly generated" number any less secure than 1000 "very large randomly generated" numbers...  A seed is basically just another "private key"... For a deterministic wallet, it's the starting point for deriving all your other private keys... such that you will be able to recover all of your private keys, knowing just the seed. It makes backups ridiculously easy and means you only need to secure 1 thing... instead of 1000 things... which makes it a lot easier to create an "offline" backup that is non-digital and can be stored in "permanent" media (like paper, stamped into metal etc) Whereas, for a non-deterministic wallet, if you lose your private keys, they're gone... you'll never be able to recreate them in a billion years of trying... and writing/printing out thousands of keys is a nightmare! Nevermind trying to recover from those backups! Your only real option would be "digital" backups of wallet files and such. So, what is it exactly that you don't understand about seeds? ... and why do you consider them "less secure"? |
|
|
|
Keep in mind that LoyceV has that data in a .txt file, so for you to convert it to CSV you going to need a workaround, and the easiest one would be using MS Excel. Or you could simply rename the file from blockdata.txt to blockdata.csv  No need to convert anything... a .csv is a plaintext file... it's just got the .csv extension to indicate that the data contained in the text file is in "comma separated value" format... ie. it is just a bunch of rows/columns where the column delimiter is "," and, optionally, the first row is column headers. |
|
|
|
Hi
Electrum wont open on Mac OS 10.7.5, even tho it's stated to be compatible with Mac OS 10.13 and higher...?
Am I missing something..?
ummmm... just wanted to point out that 13 is higher than 7... so if it is "10.13 or higher"... then I guess that probably explains why it doesn't work on 10.7  |
|
|
|
It's working fine here...  NOTE: You will likely need to remove/rename any "C:\Users\[USERNAME]\AppData\Roaming\Bitcoin" directory first... v0.1.0 uses the same datadir location as modern versions and it's not compatible with the current files It chucked out a bunch of errors when I first started it, and in the log I saw that it was attempting to parse the existing data Renamed the directory, restarted v0.1.0 and it worked just fine. |
|
|
|
Walletgenerator.net... hmmm is that the one where the website was "sold" and then after it was sold there were numerous claims of scams and "already used" keys being created? Or was it another one? |
|
|
|
I don't imagine an old computer with 3GB of RAM and a 1Gig harddrive is going to have much in the way of spare PCIe or USB-C tho But yes, there are some external solutions that will provide the necessary bandwidth to make it a non-issue... Although, the cost of these purchases would probably be better spent on simply buying a new PC  |
|
|
|
If you need a fast way to check all the addresses, just copy/paste them into a new Electrum "watching-only" wallet ("File" -> "New/Restore" -> "Import Bitcoin addresses or private keys")... it'll find any/all transactions relating to those addresses and you'll be able to see which ones still have a balance. NOTE: - don't try and use the 6 word passphrases, that won't work in Electrum... just copy/paste the addresses. At least that way you'll see whether or not there is actually anything to find I'm not aware of ANY wallets that used a 6 word passphrase... and because these 6 word phrases seem to be attached to one specific address, I don't think they are a true "seed mnemonic" for an HD/BIP39 wallet, but as mentioned earlier... I'd think they were some sort of "brain wallet"... or maybe some other custom system used to create private keys from words??? Given that the address from your screenshot: 1A9Tp3JjDvyQUtyQYLdDdCqMgK12sVZ238 is empty and has never actually been used, would you be willing to provide the 6 word passphrase for this address so people could try and figure out the system used? or is it the same passphrase for ALL the addresses? |
|
|
|
Nevertheless, i still don't understand how people can fall to a 2+ year old phishing attack.
"Humans gonna Human" It's just a fact of life that humans are incredibly irrational beings... and we do really "dumb"/unexpected things when put under stress/duress... witness people taking the time to get their carry-on bags out of overhead lockers when the aircraft they are in is on fire! I stopped being surprised by people doing "stupid" things a long time ago... but then, I'm old and have done a lot of stupid things myself over the years So, yeah... while breaking "best practise" and hooking the cold wallet up to the net and trying to shift funds was definitely a lapse in judgement, I can certainly understand why OP did it... The worse part is that they're likely not going to be the last victim either  Are there any reliable metrics on how many "bad" servers there are currently in operation? Is there a way to detect them? |
|
|
|
My question was on this plane whether Lily wallet is capable to connect directly to bitcoin nodes.
I guess that theoretically, you could run a node... and then run a blockexplorer on top of that node that provides the same sort of API as blockstream.info and then modify the library code such that it points to your own blockexplorer... But as it stands, it's basically hardcoded to use the blockstream.info API... so not a "specialised" server as such (in that it isn't built specifically for lily), but it's not "directly" to bitcoin nodes either... |
|
|
|
So, I got a response from the dev to both my issues... "Unable to connect Trezor ONE": Good catch. The official v1 release that comes out tomorrow will include support for inputting your Pin. Thanks for this! and "Can't create wallet from one hardware wallet device": Single hardware wallets aren't supported at the moment. It's high on the roadmap though.
So, unfortunately, this isn't quite a replacement for Ledger Live at the moment... and to create a vault, it's a 2-of-3 MultiSig... so you need three devices to be able to create one...  Might have to invest in a coldcard! Anyway, hopefully, he gets single HW support added in soon™ I like redundancy and having a LL alternative would be quite nice |
|
|
|
Thank you everyone. I bought $100 worth of bitcoin and was trying to send $50 of it to a poker site. I guess the part that messed me up was what to put into the amount. I tried many different amounts and getting errors. So i ended up hitting the max and now waiting to see what amount went into that site.
As Khaled asked above, what is the "unit" shown in the bottom left corner? Is it BTC or is it mBTC? (NOTE: Electrum defaults to mBTC) BTC:  or mBTC:  If it is anything other that BTC, then try checking the menu: Tools -> Preferences -> General And set the "Base Unit" to "BTC" (and the "zeros after decimal point" value to  ... it'll save you from any unit confusion in the future! |
|
|
|
2. You right about cold wallet is always offline, and electrum can be cold wallet to, cause as you say t's used to sign transactions, and those transactions will be broadcast online by another computer. But I didn't do that. I was hurry up and was shocked and connect to internet to do that transaction quick.
Then don't call it cold wallet. You were using an online (hot-) wallet and fell for an extremely old phishing scam. I think you missed his point Bob... he was using it as a cold wallet... but, unfortunately, in his panic and haste, he connected that machine to the network to try and make a quick transaction as he was concerned that his wallet mnemonic had been compromised following the burglary. This single lapse in his transaction workflow (and failing to verify the electrum download) cost him a substantial amount of money |
|
|
|
Who knows.. Connectivity to Trezor/Ledger is welcomed but is this SPV client or the wallet that relies on specialized servers just as Electrum does? If it connects to its own servers how many of them are available online at once?
It appears to leverage several libraries like bitcoinjs-lib and one called "unchained-bitcoin". As near as I can tell, it's using the broadcast API from unchained-bitcoin to send transactions out... and also using the same "block explorer" to get your balances etc: Broadcast Transaction: const broadcastTransaction = async () => {
if (signedPsbts.length === signThreshold) {
try {
if (signThreshold > 1) {
const combinedPsbt = combinePsbts(finalPsbt, signedPsbts)
combinedPsbt.finalizeAllInputs();
const { data } = await axios.get(blockExplorerAPIURL(`/broadcast?tx=${combinedPsbt.extractTransaction().toHex()}`, currentBitcoinNetwork));
setBroadcastedTxId(data);
setModalIsOpen(true);
setModalContent(<TransactionSuccess broadcastedTxId={data} />);
} else {
const { data } = await axios.get(blockExplorerAPIURL(`/broadcast?tx=${signedPsbts[0].extractTransaction().toHex()}`, currentBitcoinNetwork));
setBroadcastedTxId(data);
setModalIsOpen(true);
setModalContent(<TransactionSuccess broadcastedTxId={data} />);
}
} catch (e) {
setTxError(e.response.data);
}
}
}
blockExplorerAPIURL is imported here: import {
blockExplorerAPIURL,
satoshisToBitcoins,
estimateMultisigP2WSHTransactionVSize
} from "unchained-bitcoin";
Retrieve address details etc: const getTransactionsFromAddress = async (address, currentBitcoinNetwork) => {
return await (await axios.get(blockExplorerAPIURL(`/address/${address}/txs`, getUnchainedNetworkFromBjslibNetwork(currentBitcoinNetwork)))).data
}
The blockexplorer being used by unchained-bitcoin is defined here: https://github.com/unchained-capital/unchained-bitcoin/blob/master/src/block_explorer.jsWhich is essentially: const BASE_URL_MAINNET = 'https://blockstream.info';
So, I'm guessing the answer to your "number of servers" question is: "however many they have 'loadbalanced' on the blockstream.info domain"
It might be fixed on next release since i saw someone already make issues about it on GitHub.
Yeah... that "someone" was me |
|
|
|
Are there QR Codes in the "redeem" boxes that you have blanked out? If there are, then you should try and scan them using a wallet like Electrum that supports QR code scanning... you can use either the Desktop version (with a webcam) or the Android version. When you create the new wallet, you select "Import Bitcoin Addresses or Private keys" and then select the little camera icon: Desktop:  Android:  It's possible that the 6 word "passphrase" you have is actually a BIP3 8 passphrase, encrypting the private key... so, if you scan the "Redeem" and it comes up with a key that starts with "6P", then you'll need to decrypt that key... I would recommend downloading an "offline" copy of bitaddress.org (or visit their github: https://github.com/pointbiz/bitaddress.org) Then on the wallet details page, enter the BIP38 encrypted key (starts with 6P) and click view details:  It will prompt for the "BIP38" password:  Enter the 6 word passphrase from your PDF and click the "Decrypt BIP38" button... and hopefully that will decode it and show you the "normal" unencrypted private key: 
You can test the BIP38 decryption process using this dummy BIP38 encrypted key: BIP38 encrypted key: 6PYRJRTWwrPC7scdAPcWN9dujLRKVdMRYuKmhXuefzQGKXvqNe8Gjo7uLQ BIP38 password: This is my password It should decrypt these addresses/private keys: Uncompressed: Address: 18KmgRWoh2zYF7fBWUVzxqiipDNCoNAXEA Privkey: 5JUfBBc8mkDewG7V4TB6b3Yc7zEW8dKY3gzkeVowwAqwms9HLTm Compressed: Address: 1DzAE79eJ8zbxVM67JWZCwkcxZMd4y8Q6 Privkey: Kz95Vwp5JVkrSVhcrEXZfGEW1qcbafJp2sXueWADU6T2kx2fE1Bh |
|
|
|
Seems a bit "overkill"... it also makes it a bit difficult for someone to memorise that "passphrase"... I know humans are generally pretty terrible at creating good passwords etc and picking a strong random password is not a "Bad Thing"™ per se, but forcing a 12 word password onto someone doesn't seem like the most user friendly approach. The end user is then left with the problems of: 1. Remembering the 12 word password 2. Securing the 12 word password It's a tricky problem I guess... don't want a user to compromise themselves by having a stupid password like "password123" encrypting their backup... but don't want to make it overly complex and onerous... |
|
|
|
I really don't understand why he has TWO zpubs... he should only have one... It's ridiculous, why would the derivation path change? I understand the address but the derivation path too?
I doubt that it has changed... what you are seeing is the "change" addresses from his wallet... When you send Bitcoin, you often end up with change ( read here to understand why)... HD wallets adhering to the BIP44 spec generate a separate group of addresses for this purpose... as per the derivation path format: m / purpose' / coin_type' / account' / [b]change[/b] / address_index
Because of the way Electrum works, when you put the seed in, it actually derives the master private and public keys at the account level... and stores those in the wallet file. So it's basically "hiding" the m/84'/0'/0' part from you... and you need to use the m/0/x and m/1/y paths to find the receive and change addresses, respectively. That fact that you can see "used" addresses on the m/ 1/0 path, indicates that the address you have found is a "change" address... you should be able to see other active addresses on the same public key using m/0/0 Having said that... something seems REALLY off here:  That is technically a "change" address, but the sending address in the transaction that it received coins from is an old Legacy address... so... either: 1. The Coinbase Wallet App is setup to ALWAYS use SegWit change addresses (regardless of sending address type) or 2. The Coinbase Wallet App gave out a "change" address as a receive address Can you ask your friend if he recognises either of the "1" addresses in this transaction: https://www.blockchain.com/btc/tx/ac14d45dfa3bfdc5ab026643ab214d2821fe245b401ace85fe01d2958328573515FfborJuBXicY93ymX9QPf9nrQ6mHeH3k and 1JuYbj6L8UCtBF5cJHFPaNb3kJEJcPXN8h Are either of these addresses his? or does he remember receiving from 15FfborJuBXicY93ymX9QPf9nrQ6mHeH3k or sending to 1JuYbj6L8UCtBF5cJHFPaNb3kJEJcPXN8h? |
|
|
|
Nice find. I was initially a little concerned to because the "HWI"'s (ie. Hardware Wallet Interface libs) are binary files... and I couldn't see any source code for these... or any info as to where they were generated from!  I had to go digging through the user's other repositories to find: https://github.com/KayBeSee/HWI *phew* Downloaded the RC and tried to setup a "vault"... got stuck here:  There is no 'Bitcoin App' on a Trezor??!? Additionally, it seems like you can only use hardware wallets to create multsig vaults... I can't seem to connect just a single hardware wallet (at least, not for Trezor or Ledger devices)? If I create a "normal" wallet, it just gives me 24 word seed... if I try to create a "vault", after adding one HW device, there is no "create wallet" option, it just wants me to add more devices. |
|
|
|
Could I setup a bitcoind on my server using docker and access it from my bitcoin-qt?
You could setup the bitcoind on your server, but you probably won't be able to access it using bitcoin-qt, as bitcoin-qt has bitcoind "built-in" and will attempt to start it's own local process... However, you can use the RPC functionality of "bitcoin-cli" to connect from your local machine to your remote bitcoind instance, but obviously this is command-line only. If you want a full wallet GUI, then as mentioned above and also indicated in this very old (and "closed") Bitcoin Core "issue", the only option you have is to run an SPV wallet and connect that to your centralised node. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
