Best practice would be not to import those private keys... but to sweep them, so that the coins get sent from your old keys/addresses to keys/addresses generated by the Trezor itself.

I'm not actually aware of any hardware wallets that allow you to import private keys. It would defeat the purpose of the hardware wallet using externally generated keys.

It was a tongue-in-cheek, throwaway line... hence the accompanying emote Apparently, my attempt at humour fell a bit short.

The main point still stands tho... You don't even need the device attached (let alone the coin apps installed) to be able to view all the supported coins that you've added into your Ledger Live portfolio.

Sorry... who are we talking about?



Honestly, this entire forum would be a much better place if more people used the "Ignore" feature... I reckon the amount of petty bickering would decrease dramatically, but people don't and instead we get extended shouting contests and lots of red trust thrown about

And this, boys and girls... is the exact reason why threads like this exist: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2848987.0

749 inputs to spend ~0.122 BTC Total (0.1 + fee) with a transaction size of 110K!!?!

Please, for the love of Satoshi... consolidate your "dust"!

So, if I'm reading this correctly... I need some sort of card reader device to be able to use one of these? And also I would need to use a custom, modified version of Electrum?

Or is it just an Electrum plugin?

There is nothing stopping you from viewing all your coins with a Nano S (hell they even added ERC-20 token support )... If the coin is supported in Ledger Live, you do NOT need to have the coin app installed on the device to be able to view them. Once it is added to your portfolio, it'll show up just fine.

The issue is only with coins that don't have native support in Ledger Live... and tbh, if it isn't natively supported, chances are it's most likely worthless anyway

That was pretty much exactly my reaction when I saw that email in my inbox... I didn't even bother reading it. I just deleted it.

It seems Ledger are just trying to provide "what the (uninformed) masses want"... it's common sense business I guess, they're more likely to sell more units if they support ERC-20 tokens because there are plenty of people trading them and wanting that support... whereas, unfortunately, the bulk of people don't really seem to care about more important (imo) things like RBF, coin control and signing messages etc. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

At least we have Electrum to fill in the gap...

You need to specify the --otherversion=OTHERVERSION commandline option so that Pywallet knows which coin you're using... It's been a while, but I believe that OTHERVERSION is based on the prefix for the address... you can see the list here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/List_of_address_prefixes

I guess for GINcoin you'd need to use 38 (== G)

I think you're missing the point... they're not arguing that you're being bullies... they're arguing that your use of flags is incorrect. Which, based on what I've seen in this thread is correct.

What are the "concrete red flags" you have seen that dealing with Timelord is likely to result in losing money? Hint: Being "racist" =/= scammer

Indeed, some of Ledger's decisions in the past have left me a little confused... It would appear they'd rather add a bunch of shitcoin support than fix something like this. I guess "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" and more people wanted to be able to store (worthless) shitcoins on their Nano S' than people who wanted to be able to use their Nano S in an Electrum Multisig ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Hopefully they'll find some spare dev capacity now that Ledger Live is relatively stable and the X has been out for a while... not holding my breath tho.

This.

Honestly... I am a bit disappointed in seeing the "solution" to this "puzzle". It isn't really any different to something like:

Q. WhyDidTheChickenCrossTheRoad?.txt
A. BecauseItLikedCrossingRoads



Still, congrats to the solver... however you managed to figure it out. A full write up on the process to get the solution would definitely be appreciated by all.

It might not "sync" properly... That client is so old and outdated, that it might not be working correctly. However, if you have managed to open the .wallet files with MultiBit Classic, then you might want to try:

1. Look at the "Request" tab... it should show any addresses contained within the wallet. Then check those addresses on a block explorer like blockchain.com or BlockCypher

2. Try and export the private keys using "Tools -> Export Private Keys"


Finally, is the wallet displayed with a little padlock icon this:


If so, it is definitely password protected and you'll need that password to send coins or export the private keys

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should! The problems with this approach are:

1. Your "random" words are terrible entropy... making for a very weak seed that could potentially be bruteforced
2. Your "random" words won't adhere to the BIP39 standard, making it completely incompatible with 99.9% of wallets
3. Your "random" words won't be compatible with the BIP39 (or Electrum) checksum system, so you'll be unable to tell if you've made any mistakes when entering it/writing it down correctly.
4. If your words are not part of the wordlist, it'll make it harder to identify which word is "bad" if have written/entered it wrong.


In short, you are basically side-stepping ALL of the safeguards of the Electrum and BIP39 seed mnemonic systems! It should be fairly obvious at this point that this is a "Bad Idea"™

If you absolutely must have a Nested-SegWit wallet and you absolutely must use Electrum, then follow Abdussamad's guide properly... it's your best bet to get the solution you want, while minimising the risk of not being able to recover/restore the wallet in the future.

Not sure how this really matters if you're using a multisig?

Surely, once you've confirmed the change and/or fees using the Trezor and then partially signed the transaction then you don't have to worry about it, as, at that point, it's then impossible to alter the transaction and still have the Trezor part of the signature be valid... Or you could sign it with the Ledger first, then double check everything with the Trezor before adding the 2nd (and final) signature before sending.

A third vote for bob123's suggestion of contacting TrustedCoin... if you still have access to the email that was used when setting up the 2FA wallet, they will generally provide you the recovery code for restoring the authenticator.

One last thing... once you get the code reset and have spending access on your wallet again, you should create a new wallet and move all your coins to it as you still won't have access to the seed and will effectively have no backup in the case of a lost wallet file and/or password!

Quoted for Truth.

There is a lot of confusion and mis-information in this thread. I have no idea what the OP did either, but there is no way he was asked for a Google Authenticator code from a 2FA wallet that also had the seed in it...

Either he didn't actually have the coins in the 2FA wallet he was trying to use and the wallet he got the seed from was just a "standard" wallet that he found... or he already had a "restored" version of his 2FA wallet and found that copy of the 2FA wallet file in his wallet directory.


That isn't true... Ian Coleman's Mnemonic Code Converter doesn't work with Electrum seeds (without modification). Like this: https://github.com/FarCanary/ElectrumSeedTester

It is indeed inaccurate... if you have the seed mnemonic for your 2FA wallet you can do exactly as described by Abdussamad. Restore from seed and select "Disable" when asked if you want to keep 2FA. Essentially, the 2FA seed mnemonic encodes 2 of the 3 private keys necessary to recreate the 2-of-3 multisig with full spending ability, so that you don't need to utilise TrustedCoin.

Basically with an Electum 2FA wallet you have a 2-of-3 MultiSig arranged as:
Private Key #1 - Derived from your 2FA wallet seed mnemonic and stored in wallet file
Private Key #2 - Derived from your 2FA wallet seed mnemonic but not stored in wallet file
Private Key #3 - Held by TrustedCoin

NOTE: Unlike a "standard" Electrum wallet, the seed mnemonic itself is not stored in a 2FA wallet file

When you want to send, you sign with Private Key #1 from your wallet and then send the partially signed transaction to TrustedCoin to sign with Private Key #3 that they are holding (after you complete the 2FA requirements of course ).


The recovery method is to restore using your 2FA seed mnemonic, and selecting "Disable" when asked if you want to keep 2FA:


Then you will get a wallet that has private keys #1 and #2 included... satisfying the 2-of-3 requirement and allowing you to spend coins without needing to send to TrustedCoin and needing the Google Authenticator code etc.

---

@jackg the only reason you'd need to be using private keys and manually creating 2-of-3 wallets is when you're trying to recover "forkcoins" from Electrum 2FA wallets... that is about the only reason I can think of that you'd need to start messing about with private keys as opposed to simply restoring from seed.

Have a read of: https://btcarmory.com/docs/pathing

It explains how to create .conf files to specify the various custom directories for where things are located. This is probably your best option to get it to find your custom Bitcoin Core data directory. For instance, I have mine in E:\Bitcoin...

Having said that... I currently just have it specified in "File -> Settings"... and put E:\Bitcoin in as "Bitcoin Home Dir":



Seems to be working ok on Windows 10+Armory 0.96.5+Bitcoin Core 0.18.1

Seems like you might have some ghost processes that have the sockets/ports open. You need to kill these ghost processes (or simply restart your computer) and try again.

Quoted, but I cannot verify it... what wallet are you using?

Most of the common verification systems are unable to verify "3-type" addresses... and it's not verifying in Trezor (which is the only one I know that works with P2SH addresses)