I love the idea of Opendimes. I just wish there was a way to securely back up the keys. Even the manufacturer tells people not to use it for long term storage or large amounts, which basically says it all. At this stage, it's a novelty. As Pmalek said, it's more designed as a one-off "fund transfer" device... as opposed to a long term storage solution. Basically you can load it with a preset amount of BTC, and physically hand it to someone and they can: 1. check that the balance is what it should be (check public key/address balance via block explorer) 2. be certain you don't know what the private key is (check tamper seal is intact) I could see them being useful for in-person trades... especially in high traffic times... you don't have to sit around waiting for 10 minutes for a confirmation etc. and you don't need to lug around a laptop or use a potentially insecure mobile wallet. Buyer can simply hand over the open dime and Seller can check the balance and confirm it's all legit (seal not broken) and then hand over the goods/cash/whatever. Seller can then shift the BTC at their leisure (perhaps when transaction volume and/or fees are lower etc or when they're back at home with a more secure setup/wallet), knowing that the Buyer has no idea what the private key is.
|
|
|
Think I stumbled across someone farming posts with a couple of accounts... these two users seem to have a quick little 5 or 6 post conversation with each other (posts only a minute or 2 apart)... in multiple threads. Generally, only being very vaguely relevant to the OP/thread discussion: User 1: wellayUser 2: juegavGiven how close their UIDs are (2759361 and 2759363)... being created 2 minutes apart and having pretty much identical stats... and the fact that ALL of their posts are "paired" together in short bursts, I'm about 99.99% sure it's just an account farmer trying to build up stats on a couple of newbie accounts (maybe hoping from some merits? ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) ) The MO works like this... "wellay" jumps into a random discussion thread with some useless comment, a minute or so later "juegav" quotes and responds, then the 2 accounts back and forth for a couple of posts... then they disappear. For instance, Today's effort from this pair in a thread titled "If google has its own crypto currency?": Afternoon there ladies and gentlemen. There is huge variety of different solutions coming onto the market, so I am here with the strategy I personally use. In my opinion, mine is pretty rational and can help to find the most advanced solution for you
Afternoon there ladies and gentlemen. There is huge variety of different solutions coming onto the market, so I am here with the strategy I personally use. In my opinion, mine is pretty rational and can help to find the most advanced solution for you
Greetings. There are many aspects that matter, indeed. And we are not only talking about the idea as the idea, but much more about complex approach. So curious to hear yours Greetings. There are many aspects that matter, indeed. And we are not only talking about the idea as the idea, but much more about complex approach. So curious to hear yours
Mine is the following - I am starting with the niche. For example, talking about me, I am fond of different progressive hardware solutions. When the niche is chosen, I try to have a look at the solutions that are having the highest ratings along with real feedback from users. And then I am also evaluating things on my own, paying attention to team, future opportunities and more Mine is the following - I am starting with the niche. For example, talking about me, I am fond of different progressive hardware solutions. When the niche is chosen, I try to have a look at the solutions that are having the highest ratings along with real feedback from users. And then I am also evaluating things on my own, paying attention to team, future opportunities and more
Interesting, usually people just follow what everyone follows. But to be honest, I love your strategy more, kinda it is deeper and more objective. As you are into the industry, can you give me an example of the solution that meets your requirements? Interesting, usually people just follow what everyone follows. But to be honest, I love your strategy more, kinda it is deeper and more objective. As you are into the industry, can you give me an example of the solution that meets your requirements?
One of few solutions I can recommend without flattering - GetHashWallet, pretty widely discussed one these days. There are no insurances on exchanges, they sometimes get attacked, so GetHashWallet is a pretty advanced non programmable device that is simple and secure. Guys are pretty popular, going for arrow certification. And they are planning to have a campaign on Indiegogo that I believe to be pretty popular. I recommend you to Google guys and have a look at the website to get a bit deeper One of few solutions I can recommend without flattering - GetHashWallet, pretty widely discussed one these days. There are no insurances on exchanges, they sometimes get attacked, so GetHashWallet is a pretty advanced non programmable device that is simple and secure. Guys are pretty popular, going for arrow certification. And they are planning to have a campaign on Indiegogo that I believe to be pretty popular. I recommend you to Google guys and have a look at the website to get a bit deeper
Hmm, indeed sounds pretty impressing, let me have a closer look at what the guys are offering and get back with own thoughts, thanks for your recommendation
If you look at the post history of walley and the post history of juegav you can see they're always paired together... I especially like the way that first juegav was shilling GetHashWallet 3 or 4 days ago to the wellay: Evening. Absolutely so and I fully agree with you that it is not easy to find several solutions that widen the horizons and set new standards on the industry. Talking about you, are there many solutions you can recommend in general?
No, I wouldn't say so. I am only having 2 or 3 most attractive ones I am following. And latest discovery I would definitely recommend everyone to have a look at - GetHashWallet. Have you already heard of such a solution? Cause you know, in here guys are setting entirely new standards on the industry But then, supposedly needed to "have a closer look" today, after "wellay" was recommending it! ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) One of few solutions I can recommend without flattering - GetHashWallet, pretty widely discussed one these days. There are no insurances on exchanges, they sometimes get attacked, so GetHashWallet is a pretty advanced non programmable device that is simple and secure. Guys are pretty popular, going for arrow certification. And they are planning to have a campaign on Indiegogo that I believe to be pretty popular. I recommend you to Google guys and have a look at the website to get a bit deeper
Hmm, indeed sounds pretty impressing, let me have a closer look at what the guys are offering and get back with own thoughts, thanks for your recommendation Both these accounts need to be nuked.
|
|
|
But the nano s resetting issue, did ledger fix this issue yet? Or is anyone that is on 1.5.5 or earlier still susceptible? Someone said nano ledger fixed lot of firmware issue but does this mean the ppl using 1.5.5 or earlier still vulnerable to the reset issue? Or they still are and only ppl who upgraded successfully to 1.6... should not have issue?
As per the other thread... it is FIXED by the 1.6.0 firmware. Well im outside the US now and my seed is in the US. Thus im in another country. My first issue is if i did a firmware update and it reset, I would be very anxious where i would want to head back to the US immediately because of it. I wouldn't be able to even concentrate on other things if my ledger reset now. I mean, i wont need access to the funds now. I still have some money in the bank to withdraw with us debit card here. But no, i would not be comfortable with the time frame involved because this would be on my mind 24/7. Like what if something happens to my seed back in the US... does that make sense?
Then you should probably consider alternative solutions for how you separate your device and your recovery phrase and/or the storage of your recovery phrase. It seems like you have doomed yourself to constant worry... you're either panicking that your device is going to reset and you're going to be stuck... or you can't update, because it might reset and you're going to be stuck... or that you might lose your device and you're not going to be able to recover... or you'll constantly be worrying that someone is going to break into your condo and steal your recovery phrase. Good luck with that. ![Undecided](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/undecided.gif) Also HCP, if you are 100% or close to 100% you wrote your 24 word seed correct... but you never ever reset your ledger nano s with the wrong pin 3 times, would you risk doing it? Now if i did that reset one time to make sure my 24 word seed is correct and i have my 24 word seed with me right now, obviously i would have no concerns.
If you have NEVER tested your backup, then pretty much all this discussion is moot. You absolutely need to prioritise checking it to ensure you actually have a working backup before something happens (device stolen, device reset, device broken/lost, firmware update failure). Being "almost 100% sure" means nothing unless you are 100% sure that it works... the number of people I'm seen on these forums who are "almost 100% sure" that they're using the correct password/passphrase/seed mnemonic... and being 100% wrong is quite staggering. These forums are littered with numerous threads about these situations. Also, note that you no longer need to reset the device to check your recovery seed. Simply go to the "Manager" in Ledger Live and install the "Recovery Check" app... then open it on the device and follow the prompts. It doesn't reset the device or change the seed. Basically, it lets you enter (what you believe is) your 24 word recovery phrase using the same method as during a restore and then it'll confirm whether or not the recovery phrase that you have entered will generate the same seed as the one currently being used by the device. NOTE: You still CANNOT see what the current Recovery Phrase/Seed is... that is to say, it won't show you the 24 words or the current seed etc... it'll just let your enter 24 words and tell you whether or not the seed that would be generated from those 24 words is the same as the one currently stored in the device. That way, you can be 100% confident that the 24 words you have written down are the 24 words you need!
|
|
|
As per the release notes, the "random reset" bug is fixed in the 1.6.0 update... it was an issue with 1.5.5 in some specific configurations: - Fixed a USB bug that reset the device in a few specific configurations.
...which is why it only happened to a subset of users. Unfortunately, I don't see any notes anywhere on what the "specific configurations" are that trigger the reset. It doesn't damage the device as far as I'm aware, you can simply restore using the recovery phrase. Which would be annoying, but only really an issue if you don't have your recovery phrase handy and need access to your funds in a hurry etc.
|
|
|
I wonder if it is even technically possible for Trezor to enforce passphrases by default in their wallet? The passphrase functionality is currently "hidden" in the advanced settings once you get the wallet setup and I believe it actually sets a flag within the device so that the web interface asks for a passphrase during wallet unlocking. So, theoretically, during the onboarding process, the web interface could simply set this flag and basically "demand" that the user set a passphrase... at which point, we'd most likely get users using substandard passphrases anyway... or thinking that they can simply "reset" the passphrase at some point like a computer password and end up forgetting it etc ![Undecided](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/undecided.gif) I can understand the commercial reasons why Trezor are not that keen to "advertise" the flaw... after all, it's supposed to be a secure device... and saying "There is a massive hole in our security, but just use a long random password and you're all good" kind of negates that proposition and would scare off potential users (aka customers). Meanwhile, more tech savvy users are savaging them on forums/twitter/reddit etc for this exact reason. Certainly a reputational juggling act that I'm glad I don't have to attempt to perform!
|
|
|
Yes the last time i used nano ledger s with ledger live it was fine. My concern was if i don't update it, would there be a time like when someone created a thread that they could not do a firmware update because they didn't touch their ledger in at least few years and was in that very old version like version one? That is why i always dont want to do an update.
Impossible to say with 100% certainty, but I would suspect that this would no longer be the case given the changes they've made to the firmware/infrastructure in more recent firmware revisions... I would think that Ledger would likely give warning if this was to occur. The simple solution is simply check every 6 months or so to see if any updates have been released. I thought i read 5 years somewhere. So that is the nano ledger x then right?
That would appear to be correct, from the Ledger Nano X support pages regarding battery life: End of life The battery is designed to last 5 years. Ledger does not provide a battery replacement program. If battery capacity has degraded beyond being practically usable, the device can be used by connecting it to a power source using the USB cable.
As the Nano S does not have a battery, so this "life expectancy" does not apply to the S. ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) But you would never do firmware update if you dont have access to the phrase right?
That depends on: 1. Is it a "required" update? 2. How "urgent" the firmware update was (ie. is it patching a critical security flaw) 3. Whether I needed immediate access to the funds 4. The time frame for recovery should the device reset and I needed to use the recovery phrase If it was super urgent and I really needed to use the funds, I'd probably risk an update without the phrase. For the most part, the newer updates seem to go through OK without requiring a reset. However, if it is just a "feature" update (providing new coin etc) and they're not features I desperately need, then I'd probably just wait and continue to the current firmware. As a side note... and something you might want to consider, given what appears to be a very large physical distance between your "regular" location and your recovery phrase storage location... what happens if you simply break the device and need access to your funds? What recovery plan do you have? Are you comfortable with the time frames involved? It's all well and good having the recover phrase stored offsite... but useless if that is at direct odds with your requirements for being able to recover in a reasonable time frame.
|
|
|
Predictions for the next 2 games...
Chelsea v. ManU: Will be a draw... either 0-0 or 1-1... it'll most likely be a fairly dour affair with a lot of defending. Neither team wants (nor can afford) to lose this one.
ManC v. West Ham: Could be an interesting game... City might be out to prove a point, West Ham perhaps sensing vulnerability. The decision against City might be playing on the players minds, but it could also be a bit like being reduced to 10 men... sometimes that galvanises a team and makes them more resolute. On the other side West Ham might see an opportunity to sneak a win against a "wounded" opponent.
I would suspect that ManC will run out winners, as they're still full of class players and, let's be honest, West Ham's defense is almost non-existent... City 2-0 I think.
|
|
|
You need to resync the Bitcoin Core instance where you are wanting to import the "dump file". That means you will have to redownload the entire blockchain WITHOUT pruning. So, shutdown Bitcoin Core and make sure that: 1. There is no "prune=XXX" command in your bitcoin.conf or any script/shortcut that is used for starting Bitcoin Core. 2. If using GUI, in the "Settings -> Options -> Main" the "Prune Block Storage to..." option is UNCHECKED: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftalkimg.com%2Fimages%2F2023%2F11%2F15%2Fz10rD.png&t=665&c=IqQZ1uK6dJeQkA) Then restart Bitcoin Core. It should automatically resync by downloading the entire blockchain again from scratch. (If not, try using the "-reindex" command line option) NOTE: Current storage requirements for the full blockchain are around 300+ Gigs
|
|
|
alright, has there appeared better alternatives to Exodus? Because I cannot really find anything better than this one ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Define "better"? ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) What are your specific requirements for a wallet, such that you would consider using it an alternative? Open Source? Custom fee adjustment? Multi-currency required? Fancy UI? Desktop/Mobile? Without knowing what you actually want, it's difficult to recommend anything.
|
|
|
... On the other hand, Liverpool's position was further strengthened by the Manchester ban. Because of the Manchester Ban EPL has been lost a strong opponent. Even then, hope the rest of the teams will play better and create excitation on the field.
What do you mean "EPL has lost a strong opponent"? ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) The ban is only with regards to the UEFA Champions League. It (currently) has no bearing on the EPL at all. It also doesn't come into affect until the NEXT season (2020-2021 season) of UCL football. City are still able to continue playing in the UCL this season. So no EPL opponent has been "lost" as far as Liverpool are concerned. In other news, after the win(dy!) at Norwich, Liverpool currently have a 25 point lead and now only need to win 5 more games to claim the title! w00t! #YNWA
|
|
|
It's not as simple as a "Yes" or "No" answer... it all depends on your use case... There is no "one size fits all" wallet For some, running a Bitcoin Core full node is the best solution For others, Electrum works well and satisfies certain requirements For other others, web wallets like b.info work well For yet more others, exchanges like coinbase are the perfect solution For oldschool others, paper wallets are the go to solution That's why the Bitcoin.org "wallet chooser" asks a series of questions that includes the "Which criteria are important to you?" and "What features are you looking for?" sections ![Tongue](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
|
|
|
But in terms of using it, is the nano ledger x better than the s? But i believe the nano ledger x... you can send btc without having it connected to a computer right? I know with the ledger nano s, you need to connect it to a computer... am i right?
You still need SOMETHING to connect to it... You cannot send directly from the Ledger Nano X. As with the Nano S, you still need a computer or phone, it's just that with Bluetooth connectivity, you don't need an OTG cable to connect to your phone.. If both were same price, do you get the nano ledger x or the s?
The Nano X obviously. It's newer and has more storage and features. There is a reason why the Nano S is cheaper than the Nano X ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
|
|
|
HCP. At the moment, Im not in the US and dont have my 24 word seed. I leave that seed back in the US in that apartment. I do not have my seed with me at the moment. So would you say only do firmware update if you have the seed in hand?
The only risk of doing an update with having your seed available, is that in the unlikely event of something going wrong and you having to reset the device, you won't be able to restore and use your Nano S until you have access to your seed again. If the wallet is currently working and you don't need/require any of the new features from the latest update, then NOT updating to 1.6.0 probably isn't going to be problematic. This update was NOT a "required" update... Ledger Live and all the old features still work fine on the previous firmware (1.5.5) As for life expectancy... where exactly did you get this from? They say it last up to 5 years. Who is "They" and where did "they" say this? ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif) Honestly, I don't recall seeing anything regarding life expectancy of the Nano S... certainly nothing official from Ledger. In any case, I would expect it to be similar to USB memory sticks... likely measured in write cycles... So, unless you're constantly wiping and restoring the device, the persistent memory isn't being written to that often... and if you don't leave the device connected permanently, the screen is being used much either.
|
|
|
UPDATED:User: HammaSan - BANNEDReason: Plagiarism via a spinbot/textspinner Unfortunately for this user, the problem with spinbots and textspinners is that they always output something a bit "nonsense" that makes them easy to spot: Craig Wright currently wages a legal battle with the property of his former business partner, David Kleiman, for 1.1 million bitcoins. Wright, who claims to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin, published an update on the status of private keys and his ability to access bitcoins, satisfying a court decision that forces him to hand over half to Kleiman's estate. In early January, US judge Beth Bloom gave Wright a February 3 deadline to comply. Wright responded in the affirmative, claiming that a “customs mail” that holds the keys to unlocking encrypted Bitcoin would arrive this month. Until the appearance of that mail, Wright said that bitcoins would remain inaccessible. The bitcoins in this court case were mined in the early days. If accessed by Wright, they could prove his claim that he is Satoshi Nakamoto. But as the case unfolds, Wright has been accused of falsifying documents and lying.
Post has been ArchivedLOL @ "customs mail"... when everyone knows the term being used in this case is "bonded courier". ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) Anyway... after some googling, I found the original article on the DailyHODL website here: Just days ago Craig Wright, the Australian computer scientist locked in a legal battle with the estate of his former business partner over a Bitcoin trove worth billions, said he was about to obtain the private keys to access the stash of crypto.
Wright, who claims he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin, has now issued an update on the status of the private keys and his ability to access the Bitcoin, thereby satisfying a court ruling that compels him to turn over half of the 1.1 million BTC to the estate of his late business partner, David Kleiman.
Earlier this month, US judge Beth Bloom gave Wright a deadline of February 3rd to comply. Wright responded in the affirmative, claiming that a “bonded courier” who possesses the keys to unlock the encrypted Bitcoin would arrive this month. Until the appearance of said courier, Wright said that the alleged “Tulip Trust” containing the Bitcoin would remain inaccessible.
...
The Bitcoin at the heart of the case was mined in the early days. If unlocked by Wright, it would substantiate his claim that he is Satoshi Nakamoto. But as the case unfolds, Wright has been accused of forging documents and telling lies.
Original article has been archived
|
|
|
In fact, the key i found is the one that has been used to send to BTC to the "watching only" wallet and it's not a private one like i though.
It seems you are still very confused as to the differences between private keys, public keys and addresses. A private key... (in WIF format) starts with a "5", "L" or "K" and looks something like: 5KMUW3epPCabCcJqXsfBBg5c2bnZ4y2a8Qfo6YLrjoS8UfQy3HB L41NPChv8z7FxEqjDGbVx7VKc4Y4YWHwDhUETTLeXuwuzmpmcDjw KyioE9wswGdT46bfx2fwcK2rApY9w91rkyzfjtQiy4eZnmWfGNgX
A public key... well that's generally just a string of HEX and looks something like: uncompressed 130 HEX chars using [0-9A-F]: 04A627FBEA459A726926F1956898A67EBA5EC47EA53C1FE0D6977077F162D3FA16A6EE7FE9E46554A756110E4506A0334C9A4E5C1C46643654B191B734350A0F8B
or
compressed 66 HEX chars using [0-9A-F]: 03A627FBEA459A726926F1956898A67EBA5EC47EA53C1FE0D6977077F162D3FA16
Public keys can also be encoded as Addresses and begin with "1", "3" or "bc1" and will look something like this: 18tW1FHLv21JQtdLCpYSpQUSQiqrbE5Vbo 38fxhsGvmuxxWzDMvjdvKLEZ9JgKSMSVGa bc1qdpav4z3k095hn9ypt7xfsfnjut7gguz2gtf6gx
Which of the above do you have? private key? public key? or address? ![Huh](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/huh.gif)
|
|
|
Did you have to run the installer file to get on Testnet? I don't see that as an option with the portable exe.
No, nothing complicated like that... it's a simple "--testnet" command line argument... you can do it by creating a shortcut. ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftalkimg.com%2Fimages%2F2023%2F11%2F15%2Fz1lWf.png&t=665&c=674BJrbdeddHpA)
|
|
|
Is it not possible to backup the funds stored on an opendime with a mnenomic or private key? Surely there must be a way to recover your funds, should one of these wallets get damaged or malfunction?
Only if you "break the seal" to reveal the private key... that's the whole point of an OpenDime... no one knows what the private key is until you physically pop the tamperproof seal. That way both parties can be sure that the OpenDime contains what the sender says it does (by checking the Public Key/Address)... and the receiver knows the sender can't later take the funds as they can check the seal to make sure it hasn't been broken so the sender can not possibly know what the private key is. If you're using it for "long term" storage, you're taking the risk that it won't fail before you've popped the seal and extracted (and possibly backed up) the private key. ![Undecided](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/undecided.gif)
|
|
|
Your problem is that getnewaddress actually takes TWO arguments... the first is "label"... and the second one is "address_type" getnewaddress ( "label" "address_type" )
Returns a new Bitcoin address for receiving payments. If 'label' is specified, it is added to the address book so payments received with the address will be associated with 'label'.
Arguments: 1. label (string, optional, default="") The label name for the address to be linked to. It can also be set to the empty string "" to represent the default label. The label does not need to exist, it will be created if there is no label by the given name. 2. address_type (string, optional, default=set by -addresstype) The address type to use. Options are "legacy", "p2sh-segwit", and "bech32".
So, what you have done is generate a bunch of the "default type" addresses and labelled them "bech32" and "legacy" and "p2sh-segwit". ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif) If you have a look in your "Window -> Receiving Addresses" list, you'll see a bunch of addresses with those labels! ![Tongue](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) NOTE: while it says "label" is optional, that really means you just don't need to populate it and can use an empty string ie. "". BUT if you're going to include arguments AFTER it, it still needs to be specified. You need to use the "address_type", so you MUST specify the label. This means that if you want to generate new addresses on the console you need to use: getnewaddress "" "p2sh-segwit" getnewaddress "" "bech32" getnewaddress "" "legacy"
NOTE2: setting the value in .conf file simply sets the default "address_type" that will be used if you don't specify anything when using getnewaddress command. You can still override that (ie. have address_type=bech32 in .conf, but use getnewaddress "" "legacy" on the console)
|
|
|
Sadly i still havethe problem. I dont think i'ill find the seed of the watching only wallet. Can take a old wallet and sent it to or is that impossible ?
If you have the original wallet file, that contains the private keys for the address(es) you have received BTC to, then you will be able to send using that wallet file. Again, if you DO NOT have the private key(s) or a way to recover the private key(s) for instance, by restoring using the seed mnemonic (aka 12 words) or by using a version of the wallet file that has the private keys in it... then you will NOT be able to access those BTC. When itry to se,d BTC from the wallet, i can select preview but not sign or broadcast. Why is that?
Because you don't have the private keys in the wallet to be able to sign the transaction (and you cannot broadcast an un-signed transaction). ![Roll Eyes](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
|
|
|
Also, don't be alarmed if you get a "KeyError" when you receive a payment (and/or open a channel)... It seems to be a known (and fixed) issue, and doesn't seem to actually affect the receiving of the payments. They still show up. If I get brave enough, I'll try and see what happens if I run it on MainNet ![Tongue](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
|
|
|
|