Here is what I assume:
The seed has generated in first place a wallet with a different derivation path. The seed has
generated the wallet while I was offline in Electrum manager - seems like that it was
generated as a cold wallet/hardware wallet.
Here is why I assume:
As I type in the same seed in Elcertum wallet & check the BIP39 box & following type the
derivation path m/44'/0'/0' I get different addresses that I have used, after I updated the
E_Tails (I see transactions on this addresses), opposed to if I just type in the seed without
derivation path (there I see only 1 transaction on 1 address).
Here is the catch:
If I check the BIP39 box and type in any derivation path (I tried planty of them) then Elcetrum
tells me "checksum failed" & once I go ahead and am already in the wallet: go wallet > seed
I can't display the seed.
Where as if I just type in the seed without derivation path, I am able displaying the seed.
Those are the expected behavior of Electrum in those scenarios. My observations/replies, in respective order: - - Electrum seed doesn't have a specific cold/hot wallet variant, just a seed with "seed version" that also acts as the indicator of the derivation path to use.
Hardware wallet's seed wont be created by nor stored in Electrum during wallet creation.
So if it was created by Electrum, then it's what Abdussamad said (multiple times) in the previous thread: you shouldn't force the derivation path selection window by checking "BIP39 seed".
If it's the mentioned "corruption bug", then there's nothing you can do about it because if the cause is 'corruption' then the result should be 'random'.
- - If you ticked "BIP39 seed" and it said "BIP39 (checksum: failed)", Electrum will create a wallet based on the words you've typed regardless if it's a valid BIP39 seed or not,
that includes the Electrum seed that isn't a valid BIP39 seed.
So the BIP39 restored wallet doesn't have a relation on the correctly restored one (didn't checked BIP39 seed), they are different wallets despite having same seed phrase.
That said, why's both wallets have transaction(s) in them, have you been testing the wallets created through "other methods"?
If not, you might had more than one wallets in your old E_Tails and sent the missing transaction to one of them (already mentioned before).
- - Lastly, Electrum doesn't really store the seed phrase of a wallet created with "BIP39 seed" checkbox enabled, even the ones created using a real BIP39 seed.
apology for late respond.
I will answer all the questions in the next 48h
That was a very long 48hours. So, are addresses of the restored wallets the same except for the missing one? Refer to my last reply of in that thread: Okay, how about the other addresses, are they the same as the addresses from your newly restored wallet?
If it's a no, your and this ( 1st paragraph) scenario is correct If yes, it's most likely that old version bug or something else. |
|
|
|
-snip-So if it's possible to extract the private key from the signature, every unspent transaction in the blockchain should've been stolen by now.
This is a little misleading as those stolen transactions could be stolen again by other people, and then again and again, making the Bitcoin network worthless in the process. It's not a "central party steals all the bitcoins for themselves" kind of thing. " In the blockchain", I should've said " In the mempool", it'll make more sense. Thanks for the mention. The unedited post badly explained why Bitcoin wont work if his query is possible, but still a huge threat. |
|
|
|
I don't get how is that a "blockchain evidence" since you already know that the transaction is from Houbi exchange and Exchanges always consolidate their users' deposits.
How do you account for the fact that so many miners are sending approximately the same amount to huobi, often on a daily basis? TheQuin already answered this in his two replies. Here's a review: - Almost all mining pools have a setting where you can set your preferred auto-withdrawal amount, those users have set their value to 0.005BTC.
Or it must be the widely used default minimum value that's why the number of withdrawals with that amount is higher than the rest. (like F2Pool, Antpool, Poolin, BTC.com, etc.) - Most Exhanges sort their inputs (users' deposits) based on their value so when they consolidate, those with the close to similar values are the ones used together as inputs.
Plus, don't take an exchange like a wallet with few available inputs, some of those aren't from miners and we don't have a reliable way to check if all those are from miners, moreover from a single miner just because the amounts are approximately the same.
I think there's no reason for me to extend the discussion about the " blockchain evidence" since your previous reply already answered your earlier post. This would be more than a theory. There is blockchain evidence that a miner is receiving mining payouts to many addresses. I cannot imagine any good reason to do this, except maybe for privacy reasons, but their consolidating the outputs removes any privacy advantage they had by doing this.
-snip-One of the addresses that have an input that is part of the above transaction is 1Le7X5MkbXjhEWwBJ3NHzAqFatCvjHMu8h, and it appears this address belongs to Huobi. It appears that Huobi is consolidating their unspent outputs, maybe after reading this thread. It also appears that one or more miners its receiving their withdrawals/payouts from pools to deposit addresses at Huobi. Like I said, Exchanges always consolidate their users' deposits; and the above. regards |
|
|
|
Is your Windows10 in the latest or at least newer build? Most of the time, issues with inexplicable reason like this are likely caused by an unknown fault in the OS ( since your W7 OS works). Or try to re-install/update your network adapter's driver in the device manager: - Right-click Start icon, select "Device Manager" | or search for device manager.
- Expand network adapters, and use "right-click>update driver" on your network adapter.
- If it didn't do anything, reinstall it.
You might also want to remove any installed non-active network adapters that may cause connection issues, " view->show hidden devices". Hidden devices have light-colored icons. |
|
|
|
Have you had success logging back in? I have the exact same issue. Have used Coinbase and Coinbase Pro, have login info but was never given seed phrase and was kicked out when the app was updated.
" Coinbase Wallet" app is not the same as " Coinbase" so having the log-in credentials wont help on recovering the former. However, since you're using Coinbase, then you can just log-in to the site/app since you have your log-in info. Or do you mean " Coinbase Wallet"? If that's the case: It's a non-custodial wallet; being non-custodial, Coinbase doesn't have access to your backups and you really need the seed phrase ( backup phrase) to restore it. |
|
|
|
-snip-
This would be more than a theory. There is blockchain evidence that a miner is receiving mining payouts to many addresses. I cannot imagine any good reason to do this, except maybe for privacy reasons, but their consolidating the outputs removes any privacy advantage they had by doing this.
You mean something like this? ( coinbase transaction with lots of outputs): 0000000000000000046fafea54ec57f8b1d030e74d0d15545e0534fbd6e02f4dI am referring to txid d3cccd9d47798f9e26f9a95d4ebc2da651d66e606154284afaed013bbaad4850. All inputs are from what appear to be unique addresses, and all are in the amount of 0.005318xx BTC, or 0.005317xx BTC. The inputs appear to be payout addresses from mining pools. Ah, so it's a totally different kind of transaction. I don't get how is that a " blockchain evidence" since you already know that the transaction is from Houbi exchange and Exchanges always consolidate their users' deposits. TheQuin is on point, most consolidation transactions by Exhanges ( even the ones that I use) have almost identical input values. |
|
|
|
-snip-
This would be more than a theory. There is blockchain evidence that a miner is receiving mining payouts to many addresses. I cannot imagine any good reason to do this, except maybe for privacy reasons, but their consolidating the outputs removes any privacy advantage they had by doing this.
You mean something like this? ( coinbase transaction with lots of outputs): 0000000000000000046fafea54ec57f8b1d030e74d0d15545e0534fbd6e02f4dThat was a mining pool that had been directly sending the block rewards to its miners. This old pool is one of the example ( that transaction is one of theirs): btc.com/stats/pool/Eligiuscheck the older block heights because most of the newer ones have " normal" coinbase transaction. |
|
|
|
-snip- lets say online pc is compromised is it possible to extract by anyone private keys form the signed transaction file.  ? This is fully answered but I would like to add an example why this wont happen. That signed transaction file contains the same data stored in your blockchain mempool and can even be queried using a blockexplorer using an address, TXID, etc. So if it's possible to extract the private key from the signature, most transactions in the blockchain mempool should've been stolen by now. |
|
|
|
Here's a tip: In Electrum, if you see any " (?)" or " Info", click it to know about that feature's function. Given that, here's the help tooltip of the " Expires after" drop-down menu ( not available in older versions):  Pretty much everything that's mentioned in this thread.
|
|
|
|
From the app navigate to:
Help -> Debug window -> console
-snip-
That's ( from?) an outdated tutorial. The 'debug window' menu under 'help' has been unavailable since October 2018: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14573In the later versions, the ( debug) node window can be launched in " Window->Console"  |
|
|
|
-snip-
I seem to be out of options. Any ideas?
I recently had an issue with connecting to servers with domain names, can only use the servers that are IP addresses, maybe you're experiencing the same? I think it had something to do with DNS cache and solved itself after a few days. To check if it's the same issue: Look for the " status" in the Network settings; to open it quickly: click the (red) connection circle icon. If it has at least 1 connected node ( but not to the selected server) you can temporarily use any of those " connected nodes" ( IP addresses) as server. To select, right click on it and select " Use as server". |
|
|
|
How can I start Bitcoin Core on Windows without a graphical user interface, i.e. only the thread that synchronizes the blockchain? Is there even a way to start the GUI minimized (in the system tray)?
For the GUI, these are the settings that you'll need ( under "Settings->Options..._>Window"):  If you want to start bitcoind: - Go to the location where the "daemon" folder is, already pointed in the other replies.
- Now, in that folder, Hold 'SHIFT' and 'right click' on an empty space inside windows explorer (while nothing is highlighted/selected),
a right-click options will be displayed, select "Open command window here" and cmd will open that's already started with that directory. - Lastly, type: bitcoind and it will start.
In newer Windows10 versions, " cmd" has been replaced by " PowerShell" in the right click menu of Windows explorer or start menu. If you'll use that instead of cmd, type ./bitcoind instead. If you want a shortcut, you can create a " .bat" file that you can double-click to start bitcoind: - Create a new text file in the daemon folder: "Right-click->New->Text document"
- Edit it and type bitcoind, save and exit.
- Rename the "New Text Document.txt" into "any_name_you_want.bat", the important part is the extension.
- You can create shortcuts for you to link to start of desktop:
"Right-click on the .bat file->Create shortcut" or "Right-click on the .bat file->send to->Desktop (create shortcut)"
Then you can use that to start bitcoind without manually launching command prompt. |
|
|
|
-snip-
This is positive news. Obviously I need to be careful who I give this drive to for recovery. I'm tempted to give it a go myself by finding the right PCB and swapping it over. How much better is the professional software vs the consumer stuff at recovery?
If you can remember if it was detected by your PC (can be seen in the BIOS/UEFI), then the chance that the PCB at fault is low. But I wouldn't suggest to reconnect a mechanically damaged drive to a computer as it may introduce more damage. If it's the internal mechanism, then you'll definitely need a professional to do the job since it needs an enclosed contaminant-free space and specialized tools to repair. Take note, do not seek the typical " tech repair guy" but someone specializes in hard disk drives. It's your decision, you must consider the fact that you're not certain that you've set the miner correctly or successfully mined a block. |
|
|
|
-snip-
Note that, even if you recovered the file, it's possible (likely?) that you added a password when you first ran the software. If that happened, then after you recover the wallet.dat file, you won't be able to access the bitcoins until you can remember (or guess) what password you used.
-snip-
Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't wallet.dat encryption introduced in late 2011 Bitcoin version 0.4.0? If so, the chance that it's unencrypted is high and would increase his confidence on proceeding to recover the data. |
|
|
|
-snip- Now the question is was it an honest mistake or was someone planning to run with the BTC.
Setting wrong the slider into 2 of 3 could happen in most cases but during the steps of pasting the cosigners, I doubt that they wont notice that it'll only require two additional cosigners while making a " M of 4" MultiSig wallet. Moreover, the chance that all four cosigners happen to wrongly set the sliders into 2 of 3 is way too slim, if it's only one cosigner, then the addresses he'll get will be different from the rest of the cosigners. I'd say that the wallet wasn't created by accident. |
|
|
|
FYI - I found an old backup of the wallet on my work laptop of all places and its file name gave me a clue about the correct pass phrase and after 30 tries or so I got it.  Congratulations, you might want to contact the service where you've given the other wallet.dat because he might still be working on its password. There's a " lock topic" button below ( lower-left) if you think this thread's issue is solved. |
|
|
|
Is there any way a password can recover if forgotten -snip- That totally depends on the wallet, if it's a " custodial wallet" or " custodial service", then it's their customer support or recovery page if they have one. Example of those are: Exchanges, some mobile wallets and most online wallets. If it's a " non-custodial wallet", it's up to your own effort to recover your password. Options mainly involves bruteforcing of the password or using other forms of backup like " seed phrase" to re-create the wallet. Example of those wallets are: Hardware wallets, Bitcoin Core, Electrum, Mycelium, some online wallets like Blockchain.com. and is there somewhere I can state my complains and be expecting positive reply. Mostly in yoga class or during recreational activity  |
|
|
|
-snip-UPDATE: A pull request was made that fixes this issue.https://github.com/bitcoin-core/gui/pull/365Apparently, there's supposed to be an eye symbol next to the transactions that shows the full addresses in a tooltip or something like that, and restores the window length to normal. This PR makes it always visible, effectively fixing this bug. I think the " eye symbol" is an indicator that the transaction is for the wallet's watch-only addresses, thus not the actual fix. The pull request name didn't indicated the fix but one of its commits does: /commits/d476f41d5f16e3f9f6f59f358cb5649657081384qt: Do not extend recent transaction width to address/label string |
|
|
|
-snip-
Why? Guess you'll have to wait until it's finished since you've already started it.
Is your blockchain pruned?
No it was pruned to dump at 2GB by default now am downloading it fully hopefully prevent future troubles like this. Or is there a way to prune without the full download? Ah, so that's why you've resync. What I'm thinking is it might be not necessary depending on the cause of the issue. But since resync is already initialized, there's nothing you can do but to finish it, and hopefully that might fix the issue. |
|
|
|
Status: 0/unconfirmed, not in memory pool
This is going to be a problem. It looks like your client has created the transaction, but it is only stored locally in your wallet file. It has not been broadcast (or it was rejected when your client attempted to broadcast it), nor is it in the mempool of your local node waiting to be broadcast. It's possible that it's been invalidated by inputs being used/double spent in other transactions. In Bitcoin Core, if you goto the console ("Window -> Console") and use the following commands: getrawtransaction 1d66b0f1a56e7b45c9390491513c39bdf2b3d2a76d346dfee919992c6dcfa835
If it's not in his mempool nor blockchain, but he's using the GUI ( bitcoin-qt) he can use right-click menu of the transaction in the 'transactions' tab and select " Copy raw transaction" to get the raw transaction. But you're right, I think there's a bigger problem somewhere since the transaction wasn't broadcast. Can you try to use "-zapwallettxes" to remove those unconfirmed transactions or to clear up your core wallet.
If it's not in his mempool, he can just abandon it, it's one of the options in the same right-click menu ( clickable for "not in mempool" txns). I tried resync error so I'll reindex and start all over. Thanks
Why? Guess you'll have to wait until it's finished since you've already started it. Is your blockchain pruned? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
