I highly recommend that you create a new standard wallet with a completely new seed but without 2FA and move all your funds from your restored 2FA wallet to the new wallet.

At present you restored wallet is technically a 2-of-3 multisig wallet, it's just that it now contains 2 lots of private keys so it can self-sign transactions without needing to use TrustedCoin. By creating a new "standard" wallet with a normal seed and moving your funds to it, you will prevent any issues that might arise in the future... such as requiring a specific private key for a specific address or the ability to properly sign messages etc... which will not be possible with the restored 2FA wallet.

That sounds like there are "ghost" processes lingering in the background from a previous instance of Armory that are preventing a new instance of Armory from starting up again properly. It will most likely be "ArmoryDB.exe"

When that happens, run Windows Task Manager (right click on the taskbar and select "Task Manager") and have a look for any "ArmoryDB.exe" (or other Armory processes) that are still running. If there are, right click on them and select "end task"... then try running Armory again, it should start up properly

If the online watching-only wallet was created using the master public key from your offline wallet that has the seed... then the seed mnemonic is all the backup that you need. It will enable to you restore everything.

That's the whole point of deterministic wallets. They are able to be reliably recreated from a given starting point... in this case, the 12 word seed mnemonic.


Your offline version will in fact be able to sign them...

It appears that you've already read the other "seed splitting" thread, so you should already be aware of the pitfalls of the method you are proposing to use...

As has already been mentioned, it will no doubt "break" the BIP39 checksum of the "x2" mnemonics that you end up generating... but then, they're not meant to be used as mnemonics, they simply an encoding of a value that you need to be able to recreate your original seed mnemonic.

At the end of the day, as long as you're aware of the risks and drawbacks involved, and take steps to mitigate those, then you should be fine. The method you're proposing to use, should not compromise the security of the seed in any way... (assuming you follow nullius' advice of NEVER reusing the One Time Pad)

I'd just advise that you make sure you are well practised with the split and reassembly process before you do it on your "real" seed mnemonic. So, you don't have any issues down the line when you need to recover your seed mnemonic

Guess it's just bad luck that the user connected to a "bad" server first before their client got "DOS'd"... Unfortunately, there really isn't any more anyone can do at this point... it's been publicised quite a bit, the exploit is very old now (over 1 year) and of course the ability to verify the digital signatures has been an option since before this exploit was created.

There is no way to magically "fix" the exploit on older versions... so unless the users themselves take the time to investigate/read and/or do their due diligence with digital signatures, there is a chance that someone is going to get caught out until all users have updated to a newer version that is no longer vulnerable... or the hackers give up and stop running the "bad" servers.

It wouldn't surprise me if we continue to see more threads like this in the future... especially if the BTC value makes big moves and people need/want to move holdings around.

Did the balance just show up? or did you do something else after the -rescan?

It would be helpful to know for anyone else that stumbles across this thread when trying to diagnose a similar problem to yours

@Captain-Cryptory, just out of curiosity, have you tried looking in the Windows Error Log to see what errors, if any, are reported when you attempt to run Ledger Live and it crashes?

To find the error logs, start "Event Viewer"... and then look in "Windows Logs -> Application". You might need to search through a few warnings/errors from various services... but hopefully near the top you'll find one that has the "Source" value of Ledger Live or similar.

It might give some clue as to why LL keeps crashing for you.

Ok, Armory seems to be running "ok"... The problem does indeed seem to be that, for whatever reason, your Bitcoin Core is not fully synced... as you say, it only has blocks up to 615576 ...

I don't believe Armory is at fault here, as it can only process whatever data Bitcoin Core has. Are you able to inspect/post the contents of the Bitcoin Core debug.log? That file should be in: D:\Bitcoin

See if there are any obvious errors at the end of that log file. Also, check your "bitcoin.conf" in D:\Bitcoin and see if it has "server=1" in the conf file.

Not "AppData\Local"... the log files should be in "AppData\Roaming". Do you not have a "Roaming" folder?

-rescan usually takes a few minutes to complete... possibly as long as 30mins (depending on your computer etc) but it shouldn't take days or hours etc.

Theoretically, -rescanblockchain should do the job, but it's not working for you... whether that is caused by issues you've had with your block data and reindexing, I don't know. I suggested -rescan as it will simply start at the beginning and run through everything making sure that everything is checked.

Combined with the fact that the "big" rescanblockchain timed out on you, I'm not 100% convinced that your node is running without issues

It would be easy enough to change the mnemonic to generate the same seed value (ie. the very large number)... but because the passphrases used by both systems are fundamentally different, you'd never get the same addresses.

This is because BIP39 wallets use a passphrase of ["mnemonic" + WHATEVER_THE_USER_TYPES]... whereas Electrum uses a passphrase of ["electrum" + WHATEVER_THE_USER_TYPES]

So, in BIP39 wallet, if you don't use a passphrase... the wallet itself will still use the fixed string "mnemonic" as your passphrase, whereas Electrum will have used the fixed string "electrum"... different passphrase == different addresses.

And if you try and use a custom passphrase, for instance, "myPa$$phr4s3"... then BIP39 wallet actually uses "mnemonicmyPa$$phr4s3" and Electrum would use "electrummyPa$$phr4s3"... again, different passphrase == different addresses.

That's not the correctly armorylog.txt, but it does seem that your "pathing" isn't setup correctly, as there are errors relating to Armory not being able to find your bitcoin data properly...

Can you please find the armorylog.txt and dbLog.txt files here: C:\Users\Brice\AppData\Roaming\Armory

and then upload those to pastebin.


NOTE: if you can't see the "AppData" directory: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4028316/windows-view-hidden-files-and-folders-in-windows-10

There is a "fork" () of iancoleman's BIP39 tool that will take an Electrum seed and provide the private keys... https://github.com/FarCanary/ElectrumSeedTester (original Bitcointalk thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5121443.0) or you can export private keys from within Electrum itself.


Right, so the lead developer of the most common Electrum server has decided that ElectrumX will be BSV from now on... just to be clear... that is not Electrum that is moving to a different blockchain, it is the server software that is doing so.

There are two components to the Electrum ecosphere... The client software Electrum that runs on a users PC/phone... and then there is the server software which the clients connect to. ElectrumX is but one version of the server software (albeit the most popular)... there are others... and indeed I'd be very surprised if some developers don't fork Electrum[i[X[/i] and continue to release a BTC version going forward.

---

TLDR; ElectrumX server dev has decided to back the BSV pony in the "True Bitcoin" race... This might cause some issues for people who maintain/run Electrum servers, but as a user, your BTC in Electrum wallets will be safe and you will most likely be able to access them without any issues.

What exactly do you mean by "electrum forking"?

Are you referring to creating a "forked" version of the Electrum source code to create a customised version of the software... or are you talking about blockchain "forks"?

I just noticed TWO things:

1. It looks like you might be running an "old" version of Armory...
2. Your Armory has only scanned 390000 blocks... the current blockheight is 633000+... you're missing nearly half the blockchain!

Can you please confirm you are running 0.96.5 from here: https://btcarmory.com/0.96.5-release/
and what version of Bitcoin Core are you running? And is it fully synced?

If you are using 0.96.5 and at least Bitcoin 0.19+ and you're still not seeing your transactions etc... you will need to post your Armory log files

Copy/paste the contents of your armorylog.txt and dbLog.txt files to: https://pastebin.com/  and click the "create new paste" button... then post the unique URLs generated here.

After you start Armory, in the bottom right is it showing as "Connected" in green? And is the number of blocks shown, equal to or higher than the block number that the missing transaction was included in?



Also, it would be helpful if you posted your Armory log files and advise the version numbers of Armory, Bitcoin Core and what OS you are running.

NOTE: To post your log files, please don't just try and copy/paste them into a post here, it'll be too long. Instead, copy/paste the contents of your armorlog.txt and dbLog.txt to https://pastebin.com/ and click the "create new paste" button, then post the unique URLs that it generates for your files.

You should note that Trezor only lets you add addtional accounts once the previous one is "used" (ie. at least transaction has been received on that account)



Ledger Live is the same, it will only add extra accounts once the first ones are used:



Electrum will allow you to do it as you can specify whatever derivation path you want... but you have to create an individual wallet file for each account.

No... it doesn't. Electrum, being a light weight, needs to rely on servers to provide a lot of data... Bitcoin Core will store all that information locally. If you're going to continue to get 1000s of transactions to your addresses, I'd suggest you migrate away from Electrum and start using something like Bitcoin Core.

"Node Offline" means your Armory wallet is not able to connect to the RPC server of your Bitcoin Core node.

Are you running Bitcoin Core with the:
option in your bitcoin.conf file?

If you're not, then Armory will not be able to connect to Bitcoin Core to get new block data (until you restart Armory and it is able to rescan the database files directly... and you won't be able to send transactions, as Armory achieves this using Bitcoin Core RPC calls.

If you stop Bitcoin Core... and then restart bitcoind using:

It should do a full rescan of all transactions relating to addresses in your wallet... WITHOUT needing to redownload the blocks etc.


Also, what output do you get if you use: