Well, I'd be happier if Bitcoin Core was bundled with HWI and there was a special RPC command just for abstracting the wallet descriptors details. In other words, instead of importdescriptors followed by walletcreatefundedpsbt, we modify the PSBT RPCs to take parameters that dereference the specific hardware wallet in HWI, avoiding the importdescriptors call entirely.
You may not have to wait much longer  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5347523.0Seems that 0.22 will be including "External signer" functionality that is compatible with HWI: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/external-signer.md |
|
|
|
Seems like an interesting upsell... I wouldn't have thought that these devices really need the sort of protection. I mean, I can justify putting one on my cell phone because it is used multiple times a day, gets shoved into pockets/bags over and over and dropped numerous times  But my hardware wallet doesn't see anywhere near that level of usage... Also that price is kind of ridiculous... considering that similar screens for 6" cellphone screens sell for considerably less. I'm guessing it is an "economies of scale" situation |
|
|
|
Is showing unspent outputs among multiple Bitcoin addresses an important wallet feature? Why?
It really depends on your personal wants/needs and the use-cases that you are using the wallet for. As some users have noted, for them, being able to identify which UTXOs are on which particular addresses is a key component of their strategy for maintaining privacy etc. I can well imagine that some users don't care about this... so, for them, this sort of functionality is not important. Are you asking because you're designing a wallet... or trying to choose a wallet to use?  |
|
|
|
To create a transaction with multiple outputs, I am using the command decoderawtransaction and fundrawtransaction with {changePosition} to have my change address as the last output in the list (this is important).
Can I ask why? I'm Curious to know why the ordering of outputs is important. Is it to simplify the process of identifying the change output and amount for some reason? |
|
|
|
i use "trust wallet" but i know that if i will writh\copy something wrong in the adress i will lost the bitcoin so i prefer to check this twice It'll be difficult to enter an incorrect address due to the checksum/error checking built in to the addresses. As the others have mentioned, it's clipboard jacking malware that is the danger there and can be mitigated by simply confirming the address with your Mark.I eyeballs at least once and maybe twice before clicking "send" or confirm etc Trust Wallet supports BIP39 as far as I know, so you should be able to create your wallet and get the 12 word recovery phrase. Make a note of your receive address, then delete the wallet... and then restore it from your recovery phrase and make sure the receive address matches the original. That'll confirm your wallet and recovery process are working BEFORE you really need it! As for testing it... the only way to really do it with Trust Wallet is to send a small amount... start with sometime small if possible, although be aware that if you attempt to do this when fees are high, you could end up losing a significant amount to the fee. Do you have any friends with Bitcoin that might be willing to assist by sending you $5 worth of Bitcoin that you can then pay them for or send back to test? |
|
|
|
I guess it's one of the great things about crypto... there are plenty of ways to skin the proverbial cat. You've got airgap solutions, hardware wallets and paper wallet for the HODLers. You've got desktop wallets for the "average" user. You've got mobile wallets for users who need access "on the go". You've got exchanges for the traders... and you've got web wallets for people who don't like money Seriously tho, it's quite staggering how much choice there really is... no surprises that it can be a difficult choice for newbies. |
|
|
|
|
Interesting that it seems to be an issue specifically with the VMs... as the bare metal runs fine. I'm guessing there is some quirk with the virtualisation that is causing issues perhaps?
|
|
|
|
Ubuntu has the advantage of being quite popular so there are literally hundreds of guides around on how to install, configure and use it... Are you considering using Electrum as your airgapped wallet? If so, the Electrum docs have an ok guide on how to set up the wallet side of things after you get your OS etc sorted. https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/coldstorage.htmlBasically, you just create a "standard" wallet on the airgapped machine, then a "watching-only" wallet using the "xpub" on your online machine... It's not terribly difficult. The real issue is making sure you properly airgap the machine (ensuring no networking/wifi etc after the OS is setup and BEFORE you create the wallets) |
|
|
|
|
You need to remember that saying things like "Don't use Windows" does not work for a vast majority of people who have neither the time, nor inclination to learn the inner workings of Linux etc...
Linux has certainly come a long way from the old days of slackware and compiling your own kernels etc... but it still has some quirks that can be particularly frustrating for folks for whom the commandline is just a big black window of doom.
Direworlf's advice is on point... regardless of the OS chosen, you need to learn how to keep it safe... Linux can be just as "poor" as Windows if it isn't used/configured properly.
Blindly thinking that "I downloaded and installed this Linux distro, so now I must be impervious to all cyber threats" is a hazardous attitude.
|
|
|
|
Exactly, and we can say that new people who never used hardware wallets before may be their main target.
And that's what I don't get... mailing some random a hardware wallet? Mind you, people™ are stupid and like free stuff... so if you managed to get the details of people, say by running a fake giveaway on Telegram or Twitter etc... you could probably find a lot of people to send them to. Whether those people are likely to have anything worth stealing tho? They can get addresses for people who ordered Ledger when they got hacked with leaked database, but I doubt many will fall for this cheap trick.
And that's the rub isn't it... a list of people who think they have (or will have) assets worth protecting are less likely to fall for this... whereas ones who have never used a hardware wallet will likely fall for it more easily, but are less likely to have assets worth a lot. Ultimately, it's an interesting story... but I don't anticipate it being a "huge" problem (like phishing websites and fake software downloads etc) |
|
|
|
... not only should users able to run their own blind servers but also they should be able to tether their wallets to a server without any Internet connection. I can easily (not really, but still) broadcast a signed message using different means, but I can't sign my transaction in the case of Jade wallet because I can't get my god damn PIN offline. ...
Yeah, it's a step in the "always online" direction that things like gaming consoles and PC Games have taken in terms of DRM and copy-protection etc. Yes, large numbers of the world are "online" and mostly "always online"... but that doesn't make it right.  They are looking to go after the Coinbase / Gemini / etc. type users that want that warm security blanket type feeling.
^^-- THIS! I suspect that might be the reason for the pricing strategy as well... Personally, I was just curious to have an experiment and see how it all worked in practice... and try a few scenarios to get a feel for the typical and atypical use cases. Certainly would not be advising anyone to actually buy one |
|
|
|
Yeah... I've set a Raspiblitz up with just a standard HDD... I "cheated" and copied the block data over from another node and just the txindexing has taken over 24 hours so far... and it's about 75% done. The copying of the raw block data took many hours as well (but I can't blame that on the Pi ) There is no denying that the Raspberry Pi's are a nifty devices, but it certainly isn't a processing powerhouse |
|
|
|
|
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree... As I pointed out, it's very easy for the value of cryptocurrency to increase quite dramatically in a short space of time (it's also possible for it to become quite worthless as well, but I digress). Your "nothing worth keeping" might turn into a significant amount of money in a very short time.
If you make a small investment in your security at the beginning (be it with a airgap setup or a hardware wallet or a properly created "paper" wallet etc), you'll sleep a lot better knowing your funds are secure than worrying about how you go about securely moving things from your mobile phone when the price goes nuts.
Still... I guess it comes down to the individual. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting... It's basically the equivalent of mailing someone a phishing website.
You have to wonder what the capital investment is here... $60+shipping for each device, probably not more than a few dollars for the replacement chips, then the postage to send them out. All in the hope that people are going to give you their 24 word seed.
Still, if you sent out 500 units, I guess you only really need 1 person with 1+ BTC to fall for this to make some money.
|
|
|
|
If I were to suggest an amount of Bitcoin you're holding starting from which purchasing a Trezor is worth it, it would probably be $500.
... Otherwise I don't think there is any threshold for how much bitcoin you own before you buy one of these hardware wallets. I would have to agree with this. There is no threshold. When I first started looking at hardware wallets 5 or so years ago... I was also of the impression that it was a bit pointless spending $60 on a device if I only had $50 worth of Bitcoin... and then Bitcoin went from $500 to $20000 Being properly prepared and setting yourself up properly to start with is a much better idea than suddenly worrying about having potentially life changing sums of money secured by a password on your desktop PC... which you also use for browsing the web, watching netflix/porn and playing games etc. Or stuck in some shitty web wallet |
|
|
|
This is one of the cases I'm counting where recognizing the UTXO type & store, hash accordingly in a separate data structure will significantly improve performance ( I claim)
The issue would be that you would absolutely require that the UTXOs are "provably unspendable"... as far as I'm aware, the only way to do this is using OP_RETURN. While a "burn address" might not have the private keys available today and while it's highly improbable that the private keys could be found, it's technically not impossible that someone that could actually have those keys. So, if you setup a system that excludes all these UTXOs in the name of performance... and tomorrow someone fronts up with the private key, you've basically broken the system and they'd be unable to spend them. Or would your proposed system still be able to hand this? |
|
|
|
I'm looking to install an Electrum server. Only condition is it can be used to serve multiple wallets at the same time so Electrum Personal Server is not an option. Currently I'm looking at Electrumx and Electrs
1. Are there any other projects I should be aware of?
Aside from Esplora that Dave already mentioned, none that I am aware of. 2. Can I use Electrs to serve random users from across the internet like I can with Electrumx?
Yes, you can... although you're likely to run into performance issues as it isn't really designed to handle huge loads/multiple users. It's more aimed at "personal use" on resource limited hardware (ie. running on a Pi etc) 3. Can I create a Tor hidden service for both? Clearnet is not an option.
Yes you can... indeed, RaspiBlitz sets up electrs behind Tor. 4. What are the general benefits and drawbacks for both?
The short version is: ElectrumX = more robust (ie. enterprise level), plenty of options to tune, but requires more resources and txindex=1 electrs = more efficient/less resource intensive, doesn't require txindex=1, but better suited to personal use At the end of the day, I guess it really depends on whether or not you want to allow any random to use your server, or if you're wanting it as a private server. |
|
|
|
I have the 17 word backup passphrase,
Sounds very much like an old blockchain.info (now blockchain.com) password recovery mnemonic. Use the recovery page here: https://login.blockchain.com/wallet/forgot-passwordNote that you will still need to know your wallet-ID (and any "second password") to be able to recover your funds. I have also recorded the resovery passphrase words
I'm not sure what you have here... how is your "resovery passphrase words" different from your "17 word backup passphrase"? Is one 12 words long and one 17? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
