Bitcoin Forum > Other > Meta would be the correct sub for a new proposal.
Anyway, i think new childboards for the most common hardware wallets (ledger/trezor/keepkey?) would help cleaning up the posts spread across several subs.

Did you use the 'official' wallets? Or 3rd party wallets ?
Would you mind sharing the wallets you were using (link to github) ?

I am quite interested in finding out which of these wallets was the malicious one.

Assuming your node is not a pruned node and does allow incoming transactions (which is vital for contributing to the network health), yes. This is 'normal' traffic.
If thats too much traffic for you, you could disable the incoming connections.
But keep in mind that if you disable incoming connections your node basically just relays transactions. No blocks are shared with the rest of the network.
In this case you would just have a wallet which needs a lot of space on your hard drive. If you are not into contributing to the network health you can also use a pruned node (if you don't need the historical data).

Not exactly.
A space of 2048 words x 12 words would equal an entropy of 132 bits (2¹³² combinations).
Due to the fact that that 15 (2⁸-1) out of every 16 (2⁸) seeds are discarded, the actual entropy is at (slightly less than) 124 bits (2¹²⁴ combinations).

This is definetely secure enough (at the current technological level).

Correct.
The chances of generating a valid seed like this is 1 in 16.
This means 15 out of 16 seeds won't work 

Technically there is no difference between performing a scam on ethereum or on neo.

Ethereum has gained a lot of attention in the last year. This has attracted a lot of small legit companys, developer, so-called 'investors' and, of course, scammer.
The reason that most scammers choose to perform it on ethereum over neo is because ethereum offers a bigger audience (and therefore more people to steal money from).
Why would they using neo to scam people if they could make much more money on ethereum?

Actually the provider has to compensate you for such a loss.
When using the ATM you both (you and the owner of the ATM) have agreed on a purchase agreement.
If you have paid for your coins but didn't receive them (because of power outage, etc..) you have the right to demand the coins you have bought (or eventually your money back).

From the RPC Help:


So.. yes.




You don't have to use 'accounts' in core.
sendfrom is deprecated. It is recommended to use sendtoaddress:




From the RPC Help:

You can do this with the language you are most used to.
There are libaries available for the most commonly used languages.
You simply code the logic in your desired language and then use RPC calls via a libary.

Transaction accelerators are services offered by people who have direct access to a mining pool (and to the list of transactions going to be included).
One a transaction is 'submitted' for acceleration (either free or paid) the miner most likely will include this specific TX into the next block he is going to mine.

Those were helpful when fees were significantly higher and a lot of people chose a fee which was too low. This has led to a massive amount of transactions waiting to get confirmed.

Walletexplorer does not 'identify a wallet provider'. This service links outputs which has been spent together to create a list of addresses which belong to one 'wallet'.
And chainalysis.com is a company which provides a private investigation service.




This depends on what kind of mixing service you are using.
Take chipmixer for example. You get private keys with the corresponding balance. You can move your coins whenever you wish.
Not traceable by any kind of blockchain analysis.

Yes, you can change the code as you wish.
Just change the wordlist according to the required one and set the 13 words you know. Let it then iterate through the word list to find the missing word.

To make it a bit faster:
Instead of iterating all words a simple checksum can reduce the search space to 1/16 (with 12 word electrum seeds). This is a pretty decent increase in runtime.
Additionally it also speeds up the whole process if you remove the console output (I/O operations are expensive in terms of time).

This does describe the scenario, but neither 1) how much requests you need to process nor 2) the alternative setup.
Is your alternative to run one node on a shitty cpu? Or is the alternative to have several servers with different nodes set up?

I haven't done any stress testing to check how much requests are possible with standard hardware components.

You should decide for yourself whether you are going to invest into bitcoin or not.
Noone will be able to predict the future price movements. If someone claims he can, he is lying.

If you believe BTC is undervalued and is going to be worth more in the future, go for it.
But if you are just trying to make a quick profit you might get burned.

If you can see (and believe in) a future where BTC will be mainstream and adopted and think the demand is going to increase heavily it probably is a good idea to jump on the train.

But never invest more than you can afford to lose! The current price just reflects the speculation of the value.

They exist because not every service provider wants to have full nodes running. They rather use a 3rd party API service.
This gives them more flexibility and saves them additional work.




This fully depends on the amount of requests you are going to do and the kind of your alternative setup you would be using.
Without those two factors no comparision can be made.

I'd say it is definetely worth the effort!
People are storing all their cryptos on a hardware wallet.
Manipulating the hardware of a hardware wallet is definetely complex, but mostly also worth it.

While it is true that this device probably isn't physically tampered (which attacker would be stupid enough to successfully open, manipulate, close the ledger just to put a hand-filled seed paper with it),
the safest way would be to demand your money back and buy one from the original website (https://www.ledgerwallet.com/products/ledger-nano-s).

Version 3.0.5 didn't contain any vulnerability.
The most probable scenario is that your pc got infected by malware which led to a theft of your coins.
Did you check the signature? Or at least comparing the hashes? This could exclude a malicious version of electrum.
Was your wallet password protected?

You should definetely run some anti virus checks.

You are able to recover your funds with either your seed or your xpriv key.
Simply follow TryNinja's steps to import the seed into a new electrum wallet.

Keep in mind that it is NOT advised to store such sensitive information (seed, xpriv) on your PC.
If you have them unencrypted it might be more convinient (and not much less secure) to simply use electrum without a password.

You should either store such information only 1) properly encrypted or 2) offline (e.g. written on paper, offline pc, ...).

A 'wallet' is a piece of software which manages your private-/public- keys.
Each time you receive BTC, you get one 'bill' cointaining the amount you have received.

When you try to send some BTC your wallet takes as much 'bills' as necessary and 'destroys' them in order to create 1 'bill' for the actual transaction (the amount you want to send) and 1 'bill' for your change.
Also explained here.

Dice tossing seems to be random but in reality only is pseudorandom.
Each small 'anomaly' of the dice could already hurt the randomness. Thats also the reason why casinos are always replacing/renewing their dices. To get as close as possible to randomness.

While a dice isn't completely random it probably won't play any role when creating a private key since the variance is too low to be exploited.
Generating true randomness is a tough task.