You prediction was late by over 2 years 

Ok, it looks like coinb.in doesn't actually get inputs (or even broadcast) from testnet. That section of code is incomplete. Also no testnet for BCC. Transactions are cheap enough on BCC, that you don't really need testnet. Just use a few pennies worth of BCC to test.

If I understand the code correctly, you will have to do one address at a time.

 unspent A1 + unspent A2 ~> output C

then

 unspent B ~> output C

If you use the version at coinb.in, just go the the broadcast page, on the right side is a little icon that you can click, you can select the bitcoin test network there.

I have set up clone that works with Bitcoin Cash P2SH at http://www.motelmaya.com/BCC/BCC.html

I have used it to redeem several small Bitcoin Cash HODL txs:

https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transaction/8410ec11c603a02748b0257273b48e7005cc6cb20b8b7efa742d0606f711244c
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transaction/4563ecec650d1779f0181fa9dc5cbb721dff11727f1886ba6adf3155a33c8c5d
https://blockchair.com/bitcoin-cash/transaction/29c80487fbc886ff4678743da5994c5b4f829cba1538dd583e23af62b21edf31


I moved some code around to try and make stuff more user friendly.

We can recover BCH, but apparently we will have to sign the transaction while online, so not 100% secure.

It would be possible to rewrite the code to allow offline signing, but I don't think anyone will be motivated enough to do that.

Ok, I finally got HODL txs to work using your link to https://github.com/globaltoken/coinbin/commit/88f5eee6ad9114feb70c523ca7c834d99c106476

I had to change one line of code in coin.js though (line 1024 in my notebook editor after running https://dirtymarkup.com on it):


to this


I also had to push the tx elsewhere as the broadcast function failed for me.

These are minor bugs compared to the next one though.

I decided to create a tx for a large amount of BCC. I set everything up. Then I went offline to get my private key to sign it and discovered I can't sign offline. So I canceled the tx, and did some experiments.

It seems that if I try to sign while offline, I get an error message due to our javascript trying to reload the inputs during the signing. Specifically in r.getinputvalues routine. It will sign fine if I then go back online though (changing nothing else).

I don't remember this being a problem when signing a Hodl tx with Bitcoin offline when I originally tested it.

This seems like a major security breach to me. I have gone over the code as much as I can and while I don't see the private key being stolen, I am not a professional programmer either (I panhandle for a living) so something could be hidden in an obscure area from me.

Unfortunately, I don't think this can be easily fixed without rewriting a lot of code. I know it would take me months. I will probably just sign the large transaction and immediately broadcast it. My coins are still locked up for another 3 years though. Plenty of time to think about it though.

I just hope they don't use replay protection again during the Seg1X|Seg2X fork. What a f*cking mess.

I locked a bunch of Bitcoins before the fork to BTC and BCC. So was wondering if the coins would be recoverable on the BCC fork. So decided to experiment.

Created a time locked address using address: 12Cp73Mbb4PEXmDjYitGcfgPDpRRvPPxpS,
Public Key: 04882490aac1fb4de17bcd7c70c72672d291d3cbce869834dee98452a98874766ef996adec88b74 98dfb3fd3141fb3af5fa020746ceb8f11d5ee4e35d26284f7e4
Time: 09/13/2017 01:00

Resulting Address: 3BQyYQS3vSdjYHNJK8ogyo5Z3NkmzxWrr3
Resulting Redeem Script:
04b00fb959b1754104882490aac1fb4de17bcd7c70c72672d291d3cbce869834dee98452a988747 66ef996adec88b7498dfb3fd3141fb3af5fa020746ceb8f11d5ee4e35d26284f7e4ac

Sent 0.001 BCC to that address, TX=
76f21028ebdeff0c2347ae00ada70d3c32cfdf8a38178b2a032f2a030ce420e4

To create a tx, I had to manually input everything, resulting in the following script:
0100000001e420e40c032a2f032a8b17388adfcf323c0da7ad00ae47230cffdeeb2810f27600000 0004a04b00fb959b1754104882490aac1fb4de17bcd7c70c72672d291d3cbce869834dee98452a9 8874766ef996adec88b7498dfb3fd3141fb3af5fa020746ceb8f11d5ee4e35d26284f7e4ac00000 00001905f0100000000001976a9140b0f1dc4fce32f2d38bdbf822c2222d1870b999a88acb00fb9 59

Signed with private key to 12Cp73Mbb4PEXmDjYitGcfgPDpRRvPPxpS:

0100000001e420e40c032a2f032a8b17388adfcf323c0da7ad00ae47230cffdeeb2810f27600000 00094483045022100fa78e56b7ec881f8bb2eb97ea9825856ecd06941dea3ac74092d663b721379 8b02207824e621b4ee21df7591a1e8f45a45b162e5ea39cd073b70bcabc6501f7683e3014a04b00 fb959b1754104882490aac1fb4de17bcd7c70c72672d291d3cbce869834dee98452a98874766ef9 96adec88b7498dfb3fd3141fb3af5fa020746ceb8f11d5ee4e35d26284f7e4ac0000000001905f0 100000000001976a9140b0f1dc4fce32f2d38bdbf822c2222d1870b999a88acb00fb959

Tried to push at http://blockdozer.com/insight/tx/send

Resulting in the following:

An error occured:
64: non-mandatory-script-verify-flag (Signature must use SIGHASH_FORKID). Code:-26

I sold a bunch at 175, then bought them back at 125. Now it is 79.

Probably will drop down to 40 or so before it goes back up. Regardless, I am just going to hold for now. I find it very stressful to try and time the market.

Totally agree. Litecoin went up to $50 each, then dropped to $1 each. I expect the Ethereum crash to be very violent...as in SINGLE DIGITS.

From a peak of about $400 down to just over $200. Can we say 50% drop so far? At this rate, it will reach my goal of $10 before the end of the year. I will buy one Ethereum at $10 for good luck and an additional Ethereum at every 20% drop from there.

Maybe they are garbage?

If you use a brainwallet, be sure to use some non-standard characters:

http://www.motelmaya.com/_BrainWallet.html

I don't have a lot of bitcoins, but I still plan to set one aside for each of my five grandkids. Best would be if it could be a surprise for their 35th birthday. Young enough to still enjoy it, but old enough that hopefully they won't just waste it.

Coinbase just disabled 2FA SMS due to lack of security in phones.

They are allowing you to use 2FA Apps though if you have the money to get an Android, iPhone, or Windows phone.

Personally, I think people should just strong passwords.

While I hope for a $million in my lifetime, I see a $billion as being fully possible by the year 2100. By then we will probably see at least one hyperinflation event.

There are really only three ways to recover funds in a paper wallet

1) Sweep coins to another address using private key.

2) Import key into another wallet.

3) Create a tx by hand using the private key.

FTFY - 2FA is very hackable and a security weakness

2FA is actually less secure than a strong password. Phone accounts can be easily hacked via various methods. In fact, I am suspecting that OP is really a hacker that is trying to make Polo accounts less secure by getting them to require 2FA.

Accounts with 2FA allow a password reset using your phone, that is how Coinbase accounts get hacked all the time. If you don't use 2FA on your Coinbase account, you can't be hacked with a strong password.

2FA = hacker's wet dream

2FA is like requiring home owners to put multiple locks on their guns so that they can't quickly arm themselves if they get robbed.

I just used my Keepass to generate this 24 digit password: Ã:äPrQÕ¾+N=í©Sÿ3ƽ§«7Ùà2

I checked the generator and there are a potential of over a hundred different characters, so 100^24 = over 10^48 possible combinations.

There is no way OP can hack 10^48 possible combinations, so he wants to degrade security by using the 2FA back door method.

This is how you know OP is a hacker.

I found your polo password: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcyeYFXdHNQ#t=1m17