That's a good point... I guess it really depends on the specific wallet implementation and what they're doing. I haven't really experimented with using "other" apps to create watching wallets (at least not recently enough that my goldfish memory can remember), so I can't comment on an specific wallets. I am most likely getting things backwards and remembering that you need to remember to use m/0/0 when taking xpubs and putting them into Ian Coleman's tool because they are account extended keys and not root keys!   |
|
|
|
Been checking around with my network configuration, but still couldn't figure it out. Until I set the bitcoin.conf with rpcallowip=127.0.0.1/0, and it is workings fine. By setting up that conf, would it fix the the actual problems and its safe to procced?
All that is doing is allowing RPC connections from the local machine... I can't really comment as to whether or not its "safe to proceed" as I'm not sure what the rest of your setup is doing. I gave up on RaspiBolt very early on, and when straight to RaspiBlitz... it seems to take care of most of that setup automagically... with the downside being that running other things like your RaspAP might not be possible etc. I recently setup a headless raspiblitz running on a naked RPi4 8gb as well. I've got a passive aluminum case (which I like more than the fans) but haven't disconnected it yet. I have had some performance issues. Ultimately uninstalled mempool. The RPi was doggish and the mempool didn't provide as much info as mempool.space. I guess I had just assumed it would have everything.
What is missing compared with mempool.space? It seemed pretty similar to me... although I can't really check now, because I deleted RaspiBlitz and installed Umbrel to check that out. The version on Umbrel seems pretty complete (it just doesn't have other chains available for obvious reasons) although it is a slightly older version 2.1.2 on Umbrel vs 2.2.1-dev on mempool.space I haven't really noticed much in the way of performance issues... but then I didn't really test it much... and don't really have a baseline to compare to (ie. I haven't just setup an OS with bare bitcoind and lnd etc. Also, I'm surprised that "pi" wasn't deleted and I wonder how secure that is. That seems less than ideal based on what I've read from installing other instances on RPi's. But I'm not technically advanced enough to know for sure if that's just less of an issue with tor, assuming it was during download.
I'm not sure what you mean by "pi" not being deleted? Do you mean there is a "pi" user account or something? Again, I can't check because as mentioned above, I deleted RaspiBlitz and installed Umbrel... it doesn't have a "pi" user. |
|
|
|
I'm following the Raspibolt tutorial. I was successfully reindexed on my PC, and its all works fine when i move the HDD back to pi. Though there are some permission issues, so I just changed it back to bitcoin:bitcoin without a problem.
Seems like you have a good process for getting the blocks/chainstate all sorted via the PC and then migrated back over to the Pi. Nice. I have my own personal Bitcoin/LND Node + Electrum Server + Block explorer... and it's all running behind Tor.
How's your pi perform when running all of that? I mean like the ram usage and the CPU Usage It "idles" away OK:  Idle == just syncing new blocks with electrs + block explorer working away in the background If I attempt to sync an Electrum wallet with a modest amount of transactions:  It drives the load up a little... increases the memory usage slightly and the temps jump (because I don't have any heatsinks/fans or anything on the Pi at the moment, it's just the bare board sitting on the cardboard box that it came in ) And this is with Electrum syncing + mempool.space + btc explorer open in the browser on my laptop:  So it hums along "OK"... honestly, the most taxing thing so far was the electrum server indexing...
On a side note... because I hate myself and can't just leave well enough alone... I'm thinking of blowing it all away and trying out Umbrel. Just so I can see what that is like Apparently you can also copy across the data from another node, it's just a slightly more manual process: https://github.com/getumbrel/umbrel-os/issues/119I'll report back once that is done. |
|
|
|
So, I stumbled on this little piece of irony... Bitcointalk have never had spam post problem in the past, where is Mprep  solid blockchain projects with real use cases like a real casino and high win rate like Earnbet isn't having as much publicity like this new guys From a guy who just seems to be spamming Earnbet links wherever he can... What I don't get, is that it doesn't even seem to be a referral link... so I'm not sure what the game is here... some sort of SEO thing to try and legitimise Earnbet by having as many links as possible indexed? |
|
|
|
Credit for at least being honest about your intentions here... but it would seem that your only interest in this forum is what it can give you, not what you can contribute. As such, you're not going to find this a very "profitable" place. Try this: Newbies - Read before postingThen this: [General] How to earn BitcoinsSometimes I begin to wonder where these newbies actually gets these news from or whom oriented them?
I've often wondered that myself... I have a suspicion that there are Telegram groups or similar, or YouTube channels or something that espouse BitcoinTalk as being some sort of gold mine where you can make $$$  There seems to be a never ending flow of new users who just pop up and say "how do I make money?"  |
|
|
|
Is it possible to analyze the blockchain through some command line?
You'll need to clearly define what you mean by "analyze the blockchain", before any can give you any meaningful advice or links to possible solutions/guides. Without knowing exactly what it is that you're trying to achieve, it's going to be impossible to point you in the right direction. One thing to check before you begin, if you're wanting to use certain RPC calls (like getrawtransaction etc) that involve transactions that do not relate to your wallet, you'll need to make sure that you have txindex=1 set in your bitcoin.conf file, so that Bitcoin Core is indexing all the transactions. You'll also want to make sure that your node is not running in "pruned" mode. Make sure there is no prune= value set in your bitcoin.conf and that in the "Settings -> Options -> Main" tab, that the "prune block storage to..." option is not checked:  Both of these are generally required for most analysis tools to work properly. Note that if your node is currently pruned, you'll need to disable it and then resync your node. You'll need an absolute bare minimum of ~400 GB of free disk space to fully sync Bitcoin Core with transaction indexing turned on... having at least 1TB is better if you indeed to keep and run this node long term. |
|
|
|
There aren't rogue blocks as such... so the issue is likely data corruption due to an issue with hardware. Given the length of time between issues... it seems like it is a transient issue, which can be a real pain in the arse to diagnose From your previous post, you're using a laptop, with an external drive is being used to store the block data. Is it a USB powered drive, or does it have a separate power adapter? If USB powered, it's possible that you might be experiencing some sort of intermittent power delivery issue with the laptop's USB port that is causing the data corruption. Again, given that this isn't a constantly occurring issue, it will likely be very very difficult to reliably replicate this issue to try and figure out the exact conditions that cause it to happen. For instance, it's possible that adding/removing other USB devices might do it... or the system trying to put devices to sleep or low power mode etc. Have you tried a different USB port on your laptop? If that doesn't solve it and you continues to get these invalid blocks on a relatively regular basis, you might need to try and power the device with an external power adapter using a Y-Cable etc and see if that helps. |
|
|
|
This time, I don't know what the problem is, as I have the latest version of both electrum and coldcard. Does anybody have experience with this?
Did you update either Electrum or the coldcard firmware since you last attempted to send a transaction and/or had the same issue? If so, it's possible that one of them has introduced an issue... Not sure if you can downgrade the Coldcard... but using an older version of Electrum is relatively easy (you can grab one of the portable versions if you're using Windows and use it temporarily until you resolve the problem). The only issue you may run into is if the Electrum wallet file version has been "upgraded", then a lower version of Electrum will likely refuse to open it... and you'll have to re-import the watching only wallet into Electrum. |
|
|
|
|
One really complicating factor is that a lot of the "less desirable" wallets... have the glossy UI and are well polished.
Too often people associate a fancy UI with "this must be good"... so wallets like Exodus, which look good, despite having numerous flaws end up with lots of users.
Then you just have "word of mouth"... there are an absolute shit load of people who use coins.ph in the Phillipines because that is what their friend uses. It is also highly integrated with payment services there... despite being a custodial wallet.
Similar things happen with exchanges, someone finds out from their friend that Binance or coinbase or blockchain.com or whatever is the best thing in the world, so off they go and start using those services without even knowing about things like Electrum or Bitcoin Core.
As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink... same with bitcoin wallets. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
|
|
While xpubs may not be unique... the derivation path for Electrum (m/0') arguably is. So, you would need to find a wallet that supports importing xpubs to create a watching only wallet and either allows you to specify a custom derivation paths, or supports the electrum specific derivation paths. |
|
|
|
That is the same one that I found on the web... and NO! It is not he answer. I personally labeled it "ACE.dat" because it was the "ACE" up my sleeve. The post that you found is the same one I found. There is only ONE result with that SPECIFIC information on the ENTIRE WEB!!! So, HCP... you fail. But, thank you for taking any amount of time to try and help me. I know helping people try to recover from their own mistakes takes effort and I am grateful.
Well, there is more than one: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22+acedb+Created+By+Insun+Kang%22Like the TV one... and the one from the German Camera forum: https://www.dslr-forum.de/showpost.php?p=6142405&postcount=34I honestly don't know what else to say, but if your ace.dat file starts with the information you posted, then it is 100% not a wallet.dat file. You can see the Abstract for a research paper regarding "AceDB Flashlight" here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0164121209000491You'll note a couple of the authors are included in that list of names from your ace.dat file: Ki Yong Lee and Kyoung-Gu Woo and that their Bio's indicate they worked for Samsung. But, seriously... I KNOW my file is the right one. I know what, when, and where it was made, encrypted, and placed. I'm working more on this.
Ok, have fun. That ace.dat is not a wallet.dat file. I can guarantee that 100%. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
|
|
|
Also that price is kind of ridiculous... considering that similar screens for 6" cellphone screens sell for considerably less.
You have a point and I'm guessing it might have to do with a single manufacturer creating these as opposed to a few that usually are responsible for the mobile markets [more competition = competitive prices]. Like I said... "Economies of Scale"... if you have a market of millions and millions of iPhones, you can generally sell at a lower price point, than a niche product like the Trezor T. At the end of the day... Trezor are a business... and businesses are generally there for the purpose of making money. They seem to think that this is a way they can do that. Personally, I wouldn't buy one (even if I had a Trezor T)... but I'm sure there will be people who will. Good luck to them both. |
|
|
|
Correct, you don't specify a feerate using createrawtransaction... the fee is simply the difference between the sum(inputs) and the sum(outputs). Given that you already have the original raw transaction, and all you're modifying is the value of the change output to conduct an RBF... it should be relatively easy to calculate a given feerate and how much you need to deduct from the change output. For instance if this was your transaction (I just picked one randomly from unconfirmed transactions, so ignore the fact that it is NOT RBF enabled ): getrawtransaction 2c7a86754ea57332533cc0ff8ede520741d9c1028eef9c18ff40b728787f20d9
02000000000101af29796f82f33b6d04ab2520792bc2f0d67f8b18bd6dd07f007ecc992c23c2e50100000000ffffffff0202ab0400000000001976a914b16dbec6ffec390fc2211b83cc099d2e6897797d88acc224b40000000000160014d9baa78f2412c4a2fa054fa7729bb8da5426564702483045022100fd4a8dbc192a0ba598944e9011fb75e39ebc0b7bd95df3d74b9e51c97bad25e60220787eae71498aa5d8869fc0b9f4f90492402540b793431029fab39d7d5ade25870121023b2567028b6a81e157bf9e3ed084697f9d9c64d27b5a63b1446e1c2d066d050d00000000
decoderawtransaction 02000000000101af29796f82f33b6d04ab2520792bc2f0d67f8b18bd6dd07f007ecc992c23c2e50100000000ffffffff0202ab0400000000001976a914b16dbec6ffec390fc2211b83cc099d2e6897797d88acc224b40000000000160014d9baa78f2412c4a2fa054fa7729bb8da5426564702483045022100fd4a8dbc192a0ba598944e9011fb75e39ebc0b7bd95df3d74b9e51c97bad25e60220787eae71498aa5d8869fc0b9f4f90492402540b793431029fab39d7d5ade25870121023b2567028b6a81e157bf9e3ed084697f9d9c64d27b5a63b1446e1c2d066d050d00000000
{
"txid": "2c7a86754ea57332533cc0ff8ede520741d9c1028eef9c18ff40b728787f20d9",
"hash": "b579d058ec32a1b7ca9d25f42099eea173e9340ced1357bac882309fd76ddb34",
"version": 2,
"size": 226,
"vsize": 144,
"weight": 574,
"locktime": 0,
"vin": [
{
"txid": "e5c2232c99cc7e007fd06dbd188b7fd6f0c22b792025ab046d3bf3826f7929af",
"vout": 1,
"scriptSig": {
"asm": "",
"hex": ""
},
"txinwitness": [
"3045022100fd4a8dbc192a0ba598944e9011fb75e39ebc0b7bd95df3d74b9e51c97bad25e60220787eae71498aa5d8869fc0b9f4f90492402540b793431029fab39d7d5ade258701",
"023b2567028b6a81e157bf9e3ed084697f9d9c64d27b5a63b1446e1c2d066d050d"
],
"sequence": 4294967295
}
],
"vout": [
{
"value": 0.00305922,
"n": 0,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "OP_DUP OP_HASH160 b16dbec6ffec390fc2211b83cc099d2e6897797d OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG",
"hex": "76a914b16dbec6ffec390fc2211b83cc099d2e6897797d88ac",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "pubkeyhash",
"addresses": [
"1HBA5Bn828KvTtuePBbj7iZVMcSerLkCoK"
]
}
},
{
"value": 0.11805890,
"n": 1,
"scriptPubKey": {
"asm": "0 d9baa78f2412c4a2fa054fa7729bb8da54265647",
"hex": "0014d9baa78f2412c4a2fa054fa7729bb8da54265647",
"reqSigs": 1,
"type": "witness_v0_keyhash",
"addresses": [
"bc1qmxa20reyztz297s9f7nh9xacmf2zv4j8090qj7"
]
}
}
]
}
Total Input = 0.12112148 Total Output = 0.00305922 + 0.11805890 Total fee = 336 sats As you can see... the vsize is show as 144... so the fee rate of the current transaction was 336/144 = 2.3 sats/vbyte. To work out how much the total fee (in sats) that you need to pay to achieve a desired fee rate (for your RBF attempt), you multiply the vsize by your desired feerate in sat/vbytes. So, if you wanted to bump to say 6 sats/vbyte... it would be 6 * 144 = 864 sats. As things currently stand, the total fee is already 336, so we need to spend a further 864 - 336 = 528 sats to achieve our desired fee rate. This means you would simply recreate the transaction with the same inputs/outputs... but modify the change value so that instead of 0.11805890, you'd use 0.11805362 (0.11805890 - 0.00000528) as the change amount. This would mean the total fee paid would be 864 sats... and that should result in a fee rate of 6 sats/vbyte. Obviously, the complicating factor in all this is that the input amounts are not included in the decoded transaction, so you'd need to look those UTXOs up individually to find the value so that you can do the maths. But that's relatively easy using gettxout... note that you'll need to set the "include_mempool" option to false, otherwise it will return null as the UTXO has been "spent" by the transaction that is already in the mempool. for instance: gettxout e5c2232c99cc7e007fd06dbd188b7fd6f0c22b792025ab046d3bf3826f7929af 1 false
|
|
|
|
I tried to run a full node on pi 4 8GB, and the initial blockchain download is really a pain in the neck, especially that i use HDD. It's a bad decision that I made to use HDD. Yeah, using an HDD for the IBD is going to be very slow on the Pi... it's already processor limited, and you're just knee-capping it further using the HDD. I setup Raspiblitz using a Pi 4B 8GB with an HDD... but I used the "copy" option that it has to transfer the data from my desktop to the Pi HDD. My first attempt I used WiFi (which was incredibly slow) and I didn't copy the "indexes" folder, only the "blocks" and "chainstate" folders as per the RaspiBlitz install instructions. This was a huge mistake as using some of the other features of RaspiBlitz like electrs (Electrum Server) or the block explorers requires txindex=1... so then I had to wait for the node to complete the transaction indexing... which took something like 24 hrs to index 75%... but I suspect some of the slowdown might have been because I tried to enable several of the extra services at the same time so electrs was creating it's database while bitcoind was txindexing etc. I eventually had the bright idea of copying the txindex from my desktop as well... so, I wiped the Pi... and this time copied "blocks", "chainstate" and "indexes" from my desktop node datadir (making sure the node was not running of course): scp -r ./chainstate ./blocks ./indexes bitcoin@pi.ip.addr.here:/mnt/hdd/bitcoin
I also used an ethernet cable... which improved the transfer speed by a factor of around 10 (ie. it was taking 2 seconds to transfer a 130GB block file instead of around 18-20 seconds). So after a couple of hours copying the blockdata, I had bitcoind/lnd up and running... I then installed the mempool/btc-explorer services on the RaspiBlitz and was able to use the block explorer functionality immediately as the node was already indexed.  I then installed the electrs service and it took a few hours to create it's database... and then an hour or so more to compact the database... and now everything is running fairly smoothly. So, after about a full 24 hours, I have my own personal Bitcoin/LND Node + Electrum Server + Block explorer... and it's all running behind Tor. I'm actually pretty impressed with RaspiBlitz. Recently, I got power failures on the pi, which made the blockchain data corrupt, I had to run -reindex-chainstate on it but I guess I got the CPU throttled. So, I tried to reindex it on my PC, I use the permission bitcoin:bitcoin as it the same on pi. Latter if I move it back to pi it shouldn't be a problem, right?
Are you running plain bitcoind on the Pi or are you attempting to use something like RaspiBolt/RaspiBlitz/MyNode? If you're using plain bitcoind, you should be able to copy the data without issue. Just make sure that your desktop node is stopped first, then copy the data. You will need to copy "blocks" and "chainstate" (and "indexes" if your desktop is set to use txindex=1 and you also want the Pi to do the same) from the desktop node datadir. Also, is there any chance to prevent the data from corrupted if it got unclean/forcefully shut down? Is the thing on the Linux OS/file system side or there should be some way on the bitcoin node that able to make the data safe even if it is got unclean shutdown?
There isn't really much you can do... even on a desktop, or Windows... an unclean shutdown can corrupt data. Usually, this should only affect the last block file, so a reindex (while time consuming) should fix it. Are you using an "official" Pi powersupply? Or just a generic USB adapter? The Pi's can be quite power sensitive and an external HDD will require more power than an external SSD... using a generic USB adapter might be causing power delivery issues. I got an official power supply... it was like US$8 from my local Pi stockist. I've not had any issues as yet (touch wood)... it seems pretty solid. |
|
|
|
ive found 7 so far, ranging between 0.01 (label: freebitcoins, lol!) and 0.000001 basicly. (mostly 0.00005 or 1 How many addresses hold a balance? And if they do, don't forget about Forkcoins. There were a couple of Bitcoin "forks" (like Bitcoin Cash, BSV, Bitcoin Gold etc)... if you have Bitcoin wallets from before 1 August 2017, then you essentially have access to all of these forks (Some of which are of value, some of which are not). For instance: BCH is currently ~US$488 BSV is currently ~US$138 BTG is currently ~US$45 So, obviously, deal with all the BTC first and make sure you have moved them all to "new" addresses/private keys... then you can use all the "old" addresses/privates keys to access all the forked coins... if you deem the time and effort worth the hassle, as in total, at today's prices, the ones which can be traded out easily are probably worth around 2% of your total recovered BTC. |
|
|
|
So by removing the original chip, he was able to replace it with the same type of chip that contains an unofficial firmware. If you were to plug that device into your computer and open up the official Ledger Live software, the hardware device wouldn't be able to connect to Ledger servers, download updates, or new firmware releases. That's how you could tell it's fake.
I guess it has to come hand in hand with a fake software and installation instructions that ask the victim to enter their seed into the software. You will have to make multiple mistakes and completely swerve away from everything you learned about setting up a hardware device, storing a seed, and so on.
I still think that will be enough for plenty of people to be tricked into losing their crypto assets.
Yeah... it was basically the same as the first fake... but instead of having an extra Mass Storage module soldered onto the Ledger's mainboard, he simply replaced the chip with a generic one and then programmed it to act as the mass storage with a fake .exe etc. (in the video it was just setup to launcher a calculator, but had the name Ledger.exe and the Ledger Live logo etc.) The only difference between this and the first fake, was that you couldn't tell that the hardware was fake by opening the device and inspecting it. There was literally zero visible difference between his fake with the replaced chip and an authentic Ledger device  So, theoretically, this is a slightly better fake than the ones already in circulation... |
|
|
|
Back to my original question, are these both commands python3 -m pip install --user & sudo pip3 do the same thing?
python3 and pip3 are the same? are they both for installing Electrum-4.1.4.tar.gz, just one does it for all users, the other for only one sudo user?
And since the second command works for me, can i continue using Electrum installed that way, without compromising security or privacy? Will it work without conflicts with a setup i am planning to do: Core+Tor+Electrum+EPS+Trezor?
In terms of security... No. In terms of privacy... it means that any user of the system could potentially tell that Electrum is installed (ie. the system might be being used for bitcoin etc). Whether that is a major concern will likely depend on whether it is a shared system. Otherwise, if the sudo command is working, and you can run Electrum (and the potential privacy issue isn't an issue for you) then I wouldn't be too concerned about it. |
|
|
|
I will just use a new wallet, as I did not verify the "old version electrum" which I used to create the wallet.
Probably the best solution. Just know that you should still be able to import your old wallet without issue should you need to recover funds from it. |
|
|
|
Description of Problem: Attempted restore fails. Error: Cannot load wallet(1): UnicodeDecodeError('UTF-8', )............ then a bunch of what looks like header information. \x00\x10\x80\
This is generally a sign that the wallet you are attempting to open is not an Electrum wallet... or it is severely corrupted. This is some of the contents of the file.
Created By Insun Kang, Young-Seok Kim, Kyoung-Gu Woo, Heegyu Jin, Kyung-Sub Min, Taewon Lee, Dongseop Kwon, KyungWha Hong, Shin HoChul, Ki Yong Lee, DongJin Choi, Ilhwan Choi, Dongjoon Hyun, Seokjin Hong, Ki Yong Lee, SangJung Woo, Hyoungmin Park, Chuho Chang
And this is 100% a sign that the file you are attempting to open is not an Electrum wallet file... or a Bitcoin Core wallet.dat file either. As far as I can tell... you seem to have an "Ace.dat" file... which seems to be linked to Samsung Smart TVs, PVRs and Cameras... for example: The "database" folder contains only 2 files: ace.dat and ace.log. The two files are binary. Ace.dat starts with:
AceDB Created By Insun Kang, Young-Seok Kim, Kyoung-Gu Woo, Heegyu Jin, Kyung-Sub Min, Taewon Lee, Dongseop Kwon, KyungWha Hong, Shin HoChul, Ki Yong Lee, DongJin Choi, Ilhwan Choi, Dongjoon Hyun, Seokjin Hong, Ki Yong Lee, SangJung Woo, Hyoungmin Park, Chuho Chang
I suspect it is part of a Samsung proprietary "video" encoder. Where exactly did you get this ".dat" file from? Did you do some data recovery on an old USB stick or something? |
|
|
|
I did everything as instructed and it's still saying I don't have enough funds.
This is not a very useful description of your particular issue. I suggest you follow nc50lc's suggestion and create your own thread with a good description of the exact problem, the steps you take, the errors/messages you are getting, and anything you have already tried to rectify the solution. Additionally, include your Operating System and the exact version number of Electrum you are using. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
