Even for a 12 word combination seed phrase, assuming you already have all the words but are wrongly placed, the permutations of placing them is 12! = 479,001,600 of which guessing the correct placement is impossible.
12! isn't really a big number. If you have all the 12 words in the wrong order, you can brute-force the seed phrase in a very short time even with a modest hardware. but I've never heard of anyone in the crypto space who guessed at least two words in its seed and had access. What trip is this? You are making the subject simple, but you are making it complicated.
If you miss only 2 words, you can easily brute-force your seed phrase. For two words, there are only 4,194,304 possibilities and if we exclude the seed phrases that don't pass the checksum, there would be only 262,144 possibilities. |
|
|
|
2.Do keep bitcoin in an exchange wallet:
Don't keep your Bitcoin on an exchange. Fix the typo. However, if you do so, it can be secured when you store it in a safe wallet like an electrum.
If you want your fund to be completely secure, you should use an open source trustworthy wallet like electrum on an air-gapped device. Take note that any online device is always prone to hacking. If you use electrum on an online device, there's still the chance that your device is infected with a malware and your wallet gets hacked. |
|
|
|
But I had to pay the really really steep fees, because trustwallet fees don't match anything similar to the mempool,,,,, they were like six times higher. No matter when I checked. I did adjust the fee a little myself,, but it only went a little smaller. I lost about $38 in fees but I just said screw it ,,,,I just wanted to get it done ,,,,so now I got all my money ,,what I had left from coinomi, to trustwallet and now into electrum..
What was the fee rate you used for your transaction? I guess your transaction included many inputs and that caused you to pay a high fee. If that was the case, it was not trustwallet fault that you paid a high fee. Take note that the more inputs/outputs you have, the more fee your have to pay. |
|
|
|
With Indonesia being eliminated in the Asian Cup this time, I no longer have the enthusiasm or interest to continue watching this competition, unless I find good odds to bet on in the next few matches.
Indonesia still have chance to advance to the next round. Indonesia will advance to the the next round if the match between Oman and Kyrgyzstan ends in a draw or Kyrgyzstan win the match 1-0 or 2-1. Indonesia will advance to the next round if Jordan win Bahrain 2-0 or by three goals difference. |
|
|
|
I have been watching the mempool space site recently more frequently and noticed the low priority never goes below 31sat/vbyte, and even more weird.. sometimes I saw 31sat/vb for low,medium and high priority simultaneously... can someone explain?
That's because there are many transactions paying 30 sat/vbyte. At the time I am writing this post, you can get fast confirmation with 31 sat/vbyte. If you pay only 1 sat/vbyte less and use the fee rate of 30 sat/vbyte, your transaction would be around 9 vMB from the tip of the the mempool. |
|
|
|
That is why Iraq definitely will do their best to get 3 points against Vietnam.
Even if Iraq lose the game against Vietnam, it's not possible that Japan win the group. Iraq have secured the first place. In the case Iraq lose against Vietnam and Japan win Indonesia, they will be equal in points and they will be ranked according to the result of their head-to-head match which was ended with a win for Iraq. |
|
|
|
Only Binance holds more than 800K Bitcoin.
May I ask you where you got the 800K BTC from? According to binance proof of reserves, they hold around 597K BTC. It may worth mentioning that the balance reported by binance in their proof of reserves includes pegged tokens and if they are excluded, they hold around 563K BTC. |
|
|
|
They initially asked me to pay 65k tax which I did. Then they asked me to put 20k into my kucoin account which I did.
Did you really deposit 85,000 USDT? How could you trust them with that big money? To clarify, I just want to deposit 130k usdt into it and send them a screenshot, I will then remove it immediately.
I guess you are using a fake version of trustwallet and you will lose your fund once you make a deposit. I can't imagine you have already deposited 85,000 USDT and you still believe them. |
|
|
|
|
As mentioned above by Cantsay, the address in question is owned by binance.
And it may worth mentioning that, binance is no longer using that address as their hot wallet address.
Binance hot wallet address is now bc1qm34lsc65zpw79lxes69zkqmk6ee3ewf0j77s3h.
JustineCollins09, this address has received 44 millions BTC. That's around 3 times the fund received by the address you mentioned.
|
|
|
|
|
Each node has its own mempool. Some nodes have your transaction in their mempool and some node don't have your transaction in their mempool.
"Local" means that the transaction exists in your wallet file, but the server you are connected to doesn't have it in its mempool.
If you change the server and connect to one of the servers that has your transaction in its mempool, the status will be changed to "unconfirmed".
|
|
|
|
|
As mentioned by Charles-Tim above, if you import a single private key into electrum, your wallet will have only one address and the change will be sent back to the sending address.
If you have multiple addresses in your wallet and you still want the change to be sent back to the sending address, click on the "Settings" button which has been located at right top corner of the window that pops up after clicking on "Pay" button and uncheck "Use change addresses".
You can also use "Pay to many" feature and send the change to any address you want.
|
|
|
|
I reported a bug before and that has not been fixed yet. I just noticed the same bug exists when searching for posts. If I search for the posts made by bitcoin, the search engine gives me all the posts made by the users who have "bitcoin" (separated by whitespace) in their username. If I search for the posts made by Bitcoin SV, Learn Bitcoin or Bitcoin Smith it doesn't show any post. |
|
|
|
That's stupid on my part to include dust on the transaction. Even ViaBTC's free accelerator won't accept this transaction in their service. It may even take a month or two before this transaction gets confirmed, or I might have to accept defeat and get a paid service accelerate it for me and just blow whatever remains of that $100 transaction.
You don't have to use an accelerator for your transaction. The fee rate you used for your transaction is below the purging fee rate of any node with default mempool size. This means that there are many nodes that don't have your transaction in their mempool. You can import your wallet into electrum, try connecting to different servers until you find a one that doesn't have your transaction in its mempool and then make a new transaction. |
|
|
|
There was some talk in a forum I am part of where a mod said their attack dog was "nuking some peoples' wallets" who were trying to scam others in the group. Could I have unintentionally have been nuked even though I never gave that wallet address out to anyone?
What do you mean by nuke? Do you mean someone blocked your access to the wallet? When you use a non-custodial wallet like electrum, you have full control over your fund and no one can freeze your fund. This is so confusing because one topic says that there IS a work-around and then something else or someone else says that it does NOT work and that money is just gone even though it's sitting right friggin' there
If all you have is watch-only wallet, there's nothing you can do. |
|
|
|
|
Your transaction probably includes many inputs/outputs and as mentioned by Stalker22, the data is too big to fit in the QR code.
Are you trying to import the unsigned transaction from the watch-only wallet to your offline wallet?
If possible, try to make your transaction with less inputs/outputs. You may need to use coin control for that.
If you can't do so and you have to use all your inputs, a solution is to export the unsigned transaction as text.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a very sad news. I can't imagine the forum without you, o_e_l_e_o. I feel I am losing a very close friend, although I haven't ever met you.
o_e_l_e_o, I will always remember you and be grateful for what I learnt from you. You will be absent from the forum, but people will still read your posts and will still learn a lot from you.
Thank you for your great contribution in the forum, o_e_l_e_o. I will miss you.
|
|
|
|
If I wanted to move them all the unspent UXTO's to another address can I do so while frozen?
With freezing any UTXO, you tell electrum that you don't want to spend that UTXO for your transaction. If you have frozen some coins and you click on "Max" when making a transaction, you will send the coins that have not been frozen. If you want to make a transaction sending all your fund, go to "Coins" tab and unfreeze all frozen coins. |
|
|
|
This is proper coin control just worded differently. Just for the record, when you say the last version, are you talking about v4.4.6 or the v4.5.0 that came out a few days ago?
The possibility of freezing coins was added in the version 4.5.0 and that has been mentioned in the release note. - new: add coins/UTXOs to addresses list, add filters (cf91d2e)
apogio, bluewallet supports coin control. In bluewallet, you can see the full list of UTXOs when making a transaction and select or freeze any of them. |
|
|
|
Hasn't the freezing of coins been available for quite some time already on the mobile app?
In the older versions, you could freeze addresses, not the coins. Assume that you have UTXOs A and B in the same address. In the older versions, you couldn't freeze UTXO A without freezing UTXO B. In the latest version, you can freeze each of UTXOs A and B without freezing the other one. |
|
|
|
and nodes will have both the old and the new transactions since the nodes settings allows that.
I don't think there's any node with such behavior. Nodes don't keep two conflicting transactions in their mempool. If a node has enabled full RBF treats all transactions as RBF-enabled and would remove the first transaction from its mempool once it receives the replacement transaction even if the original transaction hasn't been flagged as RBF. (This is assuming the fee used for the replacement transaction is sufficient.) If a node has not enabled full RBF and the original transaction has not been flagged as RBF, it would reject the second transaction and keep the first one. Note that it's possible that some nodes have the first transaction in their mempool and some have the second transaction, but no node would keep both transactions. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
