Hello. After extensive use, I have a few questions about Electrum:
- Regarding Electrum addresses with asterisk under "Tx" column. Why have some of these addresses seen previous use (even before I generated the wallet)?
- Can the Electrum seed phrase program be modified to generate a 256 bit seed phrase? Can this be made a cmdline option, e.g. --strength [128,256]? If not, would a fork be possible?
I can handle lots of 12 word phrases easily; I want more security. I like Electrum, but I'm concerned about 128 bit security and also how certain addresses (with asterisks) have seen previous use according to blockchain.info. Please explain how this is possible. 128 bit seed phrase is ok, but 256 bit option would put Electrum over the top for me.
I do not think there is a serious reason to use 256 bits of entropy. (you might be confused because of RSA, for which a 128 bits key is too short. we're not talking about the same thing here) if the addresses you generate have been previously used, it means that you are reusing a wallet that you already generated before, or that there is a serious security issue with Electrum. Switch to a full server and you'll recover your full history, not just the asterisks. if you believe this is the case, can you PM me the master public key? |
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/yQligOg.pngIs the update notification working as it should? I had to click the empty space to get the notification, and it is also wrong. Haha this should _not_ have happened. I will check out what I did wrong there  Edit: On OSX that little shadow effect is not shown so I had no idea there was something clickable there. When there is a new version a label should appear there. I will try to remove the empty space itself when no update is available. Edit 2: Pushed a possible fix to git master. If anybody on windows could verify the button is now not appearing anymore that would be great The button is not there anymore, but there's a little indentation error at line 1265 of gui_qt. Just add one more space to fix it if (int(qtVersion[0]) >= 4 and int(qtVersion[2]) >= 7):
IndentationError: expected an indented block
I pushed a fix for the indentation error. |
|
|
|
version 1.6.2 was released today.
it contains bugfixes, and a gui notification of further releases.
Is there any important bugfix, or is it still ok to use v1.6.1 ? no critical bugfix in that release. however, if you encounter a bug, please upgrade to the most recent version before you report it. |
|
|
|
|
version 1.6.2 was released today.
it contains bugfixes, and a gui notification of further releases.
also, the spanish translation is complete.
localization is now available with the osX builds
|
|
|
|
Very first time using client. Balance is zero right now.
I made a deposit to my electrum address of 1.5 btc. That went fine. Then I made a payment with my electrum client of 1.0 BTC. That went fine too but now the electrum indicates my balance is 2.0? What's going on here? Very hard to figure out what the real/true balance is here. The history also doesn't even show the last transaction. To get the last transaction to show up, I had to do another transaction. Are these bugs within the program? I do like concept of Electrum, but the information displayed to the user is either wrong or just deceiving? Anyone help?
we had some server bugs recently. I fixed them, and the fixed code is deployed on my server. I suggest you connect to ecdsa.org and report here if the problem persists |
|
|
|
I need some immediate help please. I downloaded Electrum 1.6.1 for Windows yesterday, had money sent to one of my receiving addresses but it hasn't shown up in my wallet yet. The transaction has 49 confirmations as of this posting https://blockchain.info/address/1FJb2KSq2GgrsWKLyGzwzWUUDp94H7KZ6C but it's still not available in my wallet.. HELP!! EDIT: Nevermind, I just reconnected and it's showing up sorry about that. we have had some server bugs recently. I believed the bugs are now all fixed in the repo, but it will take some time until servers get updated |
|
|
|
|
on january 13th, a silent bug was introduced in the server code.
I fixed it today.
please pull the new code if you upgraded after this date!
|
|
|
|
What's the difference between Electrum and a BitcoinJ (SPV) client configured to connect to a single server? I suppose Electrum tells its server the entire lists of address the client possess, so that the server only transmit relevant transactions together with the relevant chunks of the merkle tree, is that it?
I am not sure what BitcoinJ exactly does. A full SPV client needs to download the entire blockchain for verification, but it does not store it. (it may start from a recent checkpoint, but after the checkpoint it still needs to download full blocks) Electrum does not do that. It verifies only the transactions reported by the server. For that verification, it only needs to download the headers. Would you consider making it possible for Electrum to behave like an actual SPV client (with p2p bootstrap) once Bloom filters are implemented on bitcoind? Meaning, those who want to keep relying on a single server stay as they are, and those that prefer p2p go SPV...
I don't think there is a real advantage to using bloom filters over Electrum servers. If you are a bloom filter client, the bitcoind nodes you are talking to can hide some transactions to you, just like Electrum servers. p2p bootstrap would be interesting though, to download the headers; that's something we will probably do. |
|
|
|
In theory, Electrum is not as secure as the original client, but unless you are dealing with volumes in the thousands of bitcoins, Electrum is absolutely good enough.
The greatest problem with Electrum, IMHO, is the fact you depend on a server, who could theoretically spy on you (log all your transactions) and could eventually be compromised and then start lying to you (not telling about money you receive, not sending your transactions out, telling you received money you actually didn't etc - the server cannot steal the money you already have, though). This is not true. An Electrum server can indeed forget tell you about money you received, but it cannot tell you that you received money when you actually didn't. This is because the Electrum client verifies all the transactions reported by the server, using SPV. |
|
|
|
It is all JavaScript based.
precisely... |
|
|
|
you can enter the private key at brainwallet.org and it will decode the public key for you.
please stop it. do not encourage newbies to give their private keys to third party websites. you can import a private key in the GUI with Electrum 1.6.1, see the 'import/export' tab in your settings |
|
|
|
@21after2 Solved or scammed? I confirm that there was a bug with my electrum server, that caused this transaction to be hidden for some time. so, this user is definitely not a scammer, he was probably using my faulty server. it is very likely a cache bug, because it disappeared when I restarted the server yesterday. I am investigating this bug right now. |
|
|
|
How long can it take for a transaction to show up in an Electrum wallet? I purchased a gift card from kevwang95 for BTC1.5 to this payment address: http://blockchain.info/address/1LHmGT39uLJYSfeKVbgUP5vAgrhf1GaqMKI sent the payment at 9:09PM EST, and the blockchain shows two confirmations. kevwang95 says that he doesn't see the transaction in his history tab in Electrum, and the balance is 0. I don't have much experience with Electrum, so I just want to make sure he gets the payment for the sale. Does it take a while for it to show up in Electrum? EDIT: kevwang95 sent me this screenshot of Electrum showing that the payment still hasn't shown up after 2 1/2 hours. It looks to me like he copied the correct address, which is the one I sent the payment to. Blockchain currently shows 13 confirmations, and my wallet has full confirmation of the payment being sent. I'm thinking there's some sort of glitch or technical issue with his client, but I don't have any experience in using it. If anyone can reply with some help to give him, or if they can PM him directly, I'd greatly appreciate it. there was a server-side problem. I restarted my server, and the transactioni should show up now. |
|
|
|
Nowadays a good antivirus protects against many types of malicious code and behavior, not just "viruses."
Have you ever heard about Rice's theorem in computability theory? It states that no computer program will ever be able to reliably detect "malware". Never. This is true for well defined types of "malware", where the evil actions you want to detect are known in advance. So, I let you imagine how true it remains for definitions of "malware" that the antivirus programmer had no idea about, such as stealing bitcoins. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rice%27s_theoremAntiviruses will never work, no matter how smart they become. The whole approach of fighting viruses with antiviruses is doomed to fail. The correct way to fight viruses is to fix your operating system. Anyway, thak you for your contributions to Electrum. I appreciate your efforts. |
|
|
|
Please don't use 3rd party provided Electrum binaries. Only use binaries downloaded from electrum.org. If you want to provide extra binaries, come to IRC and discuss this with ThomasV. +1 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
