Again, I have absolutely no idea about Windows, but on a pure Linux machine you could try the following command to install the necessary packages. It may or may not work on your Linux for Windows:

sha256sum won't work in this case, because it does not have an option to treat the input as bits.

-a selects an algorithm, in this case 256. -0 tells it to read the input as bits, which is necessary when computing a checksum as above.

I say! Sir! You seem to be peeing upon my leg.

That's an interesting concept certainly. Two questions spring to mind in the first instance:

How would you ensure privacy from the third party submarine swap service? Receiving repeated payments from the same entity to the same channel compromises privacy and would allow this third party to link your on-chain transactions together. Rendezvous routing? Route blinding?

What kind of fees will the third party charge, and do they have a lower limit on the the smallest amount of change they will accept?

It's always good not to hold all your coins in the same wallet, so if one wallet is compromised you don't lose absolutely everything. This can be as simple as using different seed phrases on the same hardware wallet, but would be far more convenient to have two hardware wallets with different seed phrases.

Having two devices also makes it easy to recover access to your wallet quickly and securely in the event you lose one device. You don't have to order and wait for a replacement to arrive, and can recover your coins on to your second device if you need to.

If your devices are from different manufacturers then there is additional security if one of the devices turns out to be bugged/flawed/vulnerable etc.

As a counter to my point above, if your devices are from different manufacturers then you have now shared your personal information with two different companies so you are twice as likely to be the victim of a data breach or leak. You will also have to keep up to date with latest developments in software and firmware from two companies, and potentially be exposed to two companies' worth of data collection and privacy invasion.

Ahh, there are loads of reasons to piss in a cup! We can diagnose everything from infections and metabolic conditions, right through to some types of brain damage and certain types of tumors from urine samples.

Interestingly, the word "mellitus" in "diabetes mellitus" is Latin for "sweetened with honey", because the urine of sufferers of this disease tastes sweet like honey, which is how it used to be diagnosed before modern glucose testing.

I would follow NeuroticFish's instructions above, but you can do it so the private keys never need to leave your old offline computer which is running Core.

Electrum does not work on Windows 7 since version 4.2.0, but you can still download the latest version of Electrum which does work (and all the signatures necessary for verification) from here: https://download.electrum.org/4.1.5/.

Use this to create an Electrum wallet on your offline computer which already contains your Core wallet to import your private keys to which can sign transactions, and a corresponding watch only wallet on your online computer containing only addresses to create the transaction for offline signing. That way you never expose your private keys to any device other than the one they are already on.

Do you mean the strings have 54 characters each, or you have 54 strings? Can you elaborate on what character set the strings are using? Do they end with a "=" symbol?

The only thing which bitaddress generates which fits that character set are private keys in Base64 format. These should be 44 characters long.

Are you sure you used bitaddress? Did you download and verify the latest release and run it offline?

I also don't use Windows, but a quick internet search seems that there is no obvious way to use Windows Powershell to compute the hash you need. If you were running Linux, then you just open terminal and enter the following very simple command:

Which will return the following output:

And then you take the fist character (9) and convert it to 1001 and append as your checksum.

Here's another open source tool you can use to input your coin flips and generate your seed phrase: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5373505.0

Again, please don't do this. It isn't secure, like, at all.

I wouldn't use dice at all. Dice are more prone to bias than coins, the bias takes longer to detect, and is also harder to detect. All of these things become more true the more faces your dice has. It would take hundreds of rolls to be relatively sure of detecting even a fairly large bias on a 16 sided dice. It will be simpler, quicker, and more secure to flip a coin 128 times.

Formatting or performing a factory reset is not a reliable way of permanently deleting data. Both of these things simply delete the pointers to your the data, telling your phone or other device that these sectors are now free to be used for other purposes. But unless you actually write something else to these sectors, the data on them is not deleted and can be recovered, even after a hard reset. This is the basis behind the specialized apps that BitMaxz mentions above - to actually overwrite all your sensitive data in these sectors with junk data, meaning it cannot be recovered.

Why would you ever do this? Seed phrases should be stored offline using pen and paper. If you must store them electronically, then they should be stored encrypted on airgapped devices. Storing them in plain text on a phone is a recipe for disaster, even worse if your phone then automatically backs them up to the cloud or similar.

No malware from it, no, but it is one of the worst blockchain explorers out there. The layout is awful, their timestamps don't make sense, they still report fees per byte which is usually inaccurate, and it lacks any advanced features. Not to mention the company behind it are technically incompetent and host one of the worst wallets in existence.

The two most commonly recommended blockchain explorers on this forum are now https://mempool.space/ and https://blockchair.com/.

Not as far as I can tell. It has received and then sent out ~293.6 BTC a few minutes apart back in 2017. I think it's reasonable to assume its an address owned by CSW, which he was hoping he would later be able to sign from to "prove" he is Satoshi.

Note that this address comes from the following public key:

This is obviously a compressed public key, which were not implemented until version 0.6.0 of Bitcoin-Qt, released in March 2012.

It means that some of the inputs which were being used in your stuck transaction were based on other local transactions which were never broadcast, which is why block explorers can't find them. This might also explain why the stuck transaction was never broadcast, since without the preceding transactions being broadcast the stuck transaction is invalid, as it attempts to spend outputs which do not exist.

In terms of how to handle it - as nc50lc says, do nothing. These outputs never existed in the first place.

This probably also explains why your Electrum transaction history and Core transaction history are different. It sounds like you have more than one locally saved transactions on Core which do not exist on the blockchain.

No, you are right. If the attack which is happening is limited to only a malicious RNG spitting out predetermined entropy and therefore a predetermined seed phrase, but you use a long, complex, and random passphrase, then your coins will still be safe.

However, this depends on the wallet file actually using the long, complex, and random passphrase that you enter properly. If someone has released malicious software which is generating predetermined seed phrases, then chances are they have also taken steps to mean that if you do use a passphrase they can still steal your coins. This might mean that any passphrase you enter is simply ignored, or maybe that the wallet only uses the very first character of any passphrase you enter, so it still generates a fresh wallet but one that is trivially easy to brute force.

You have potentially already solved it. If you have imported every private key which has ever held coins from Core in to Electrum, then your Electrum wallet will now contain all the coins you have available to spend. You can forget about the stuck transaction in Core. Electrum does not know about it, and any coins which it would have spent and have not been spent by a different transaction will be available in your Electrum wallet.

Take the first "txid" and paste it in to a block explorer. Then take the first "vout" number and find the corresponding numbered output (the first output is numbered 0, the second output is numbered 1, and so on). Then you can see if that output has been spent in another transaction already.

If you want to check every intput, then yes. Alternatively, if you don't mind the privacy implications of sharing your addresses publicly, you can paste the raw hex of your stuck transaction here and we can take a look for you.

And yet, compare that with all the suggestions you just made in your previous post. I want to have an address on hand at all times that I can be 100% certain is from my hardware wallet, so I can receive coins on the go without having to carry my hardware wallet with me. Which is easier to do? Carry a clean and airgapped device which is isolated from external networks for this purpose only, with an encrypted file on it which I have to decrypt, and then check all the logs of my decryption process to be sure nothing has been edited or gone wrong, or simply take a slip of paper from my fiat wallet to double check the address against?

This is amazing to see for ourselves. Thanks for sharing.

The binary changes are absolutely hilarious. The space padding, the removal of %d, the original genesis hash with a headline which hadn't been published in 2008, the checksum, and so on. So amateurish and beyond any doubt whatsoever that this is all forgery. Any idea where the edited IP address is from?

Been flipping through all the other submitted evidence in that archive. "Bilag 20" is his printed off whitepaper with coffee stains and staples, with equations which make no sense and contain characters and fonts which didn't exist at the time. "Bliag 24" is his submitted main.cpp which is taken from a post on this forum and cuts off at the same character limit, meaning it is missing half the code. Of course CSW didn't even notice. Again, hilarious to see for yourself.

As hosseinimr93 has pointed out, your checksum is incorrect. The correct final word should be "weird", not "west".

Ignoring the fact you calculated the checksum incorrectly, your understanding here is wrong. There is exactly one word ("weird") which will be a valid final word for the 128 bits of entropy you have selected. There will be other words you could replace "weird" with and still have a valid 12 word seed phrase, but given that the last word contains 7 bits of entropy as well as 4 bits of checksum, then if you choose one of these other words then you will have a different 128 bits of entropy. Further, if you choose one of these other valid words, there is no guarantee that the 4 digit checksum would be the same given you are changing the entropy.

For example, the entropy you have given above encodes this seed phrase:

This is also a valid seed phrase:

Weird encodes the following:  11111001001
Debris encodes the following: 00111000011
Checksums are in bold.

Two different valid words, but with different entropy and different checksums.

I'm not sure if you are misunderstanding or there is a translation barrier, but transactions cannot be spent and also disappear. Either your transaction is successfully broadcast to the network and then later confirmed (in which case it is spent), or your transaction is only saved locally, never broadcast, and therefore never spent. If it is only saved locally and no one else in the world knows about it, then you can also delete it locally without having any effect on the wider blockchain. Rarely a transaction can be broadcast and later invalidated, but that is another discussion and not really relevant to what is going on here.

If a transaction has been saved locally and not broadcast, then you can broadcast it at a later date provided you haven't spent any of the coins being used by that transaction in other transactions in the meantime. If a transaction has been broadcast but is "stuck" because the fee is very low, then there are a variety of options available to you in order to bump the fee and increase the priority of your transaction.

If you don't want to sync, then I would dump every private key from your Bitcoin Core wallet and import all of them in to Electrum. At that point you don't need to worry about your stuck transaction, because as I said above, Electrum will have no knowledge of it.

Correct.

Maybe. The transaction in question was never broadcast, and so the coins it spends were not spent in that transaction. However, it seems that this transaction conflicts with another transaction which did go through normally. This means that at least some of the coins used in your stuck transaction have since been spent in this other transaction with 30,000 confirmations. However, it may be that all of the coins from the stuck transaction have already been spent.

Since Electrum is completely unaware of this stuck transaction, then any coins it spends which haven't since been spent by another transaction should show up normally in your Electrum wallet. You can also look up each input from the stuck transaction on a blockchain explorer to see if that input has since been spent by another transaction.