Indeed... Armory unfortunately has a bad habit of not exiting cleanly and leaving zombie processes running in the background.

Especially if a user is running into issues during the sync/database building process and tries to exit and restart Armory.

It's a throwback to the "old days" (1990s) where the USA had a bunch of export restrictions on cryptographic algorithms and programs and suchlike as they were classified as "munitions". The idea was to create the smallest working version of the RSA algorithm that could be included in an email signature (or a signature on a Usenet newsgroup post etc) so it could be shared publicly with everyone.

People had T-Shirts printed with the text... and it looks like someone actually had it tattooed on their arm:



Perl is great like that

Oh the plan is most certainly to dupe people with FOMO into thinking they need/want the next imaginary internet thing... and should pay stupid money for it. NFTs 2.0...

Technically, it offers some "extra" protection in that if one of your older backups is compromised, only keys (and their attached coins) generated prior to the passphrase change are at risk. Which could, theoretically, minimise your losses if you tend to move coins to newer addresses on a regular basis and you regularly change your passphrase.

I suspect for most people, it isn't really of much use and just causes extra work because they then have to refresh all their offline/offsite backups whenever they change the passphrase or they face the prospect of losing coins attached to newly generated keys if the in use wallet file is corrupted/lost etc.

What exactly is it "not" doing? how do you know it's not syncing? Is it sitting on the sync window during start up but the number of blocks left is not decreasing/progress % is not increasing?




I just upgraded to 24.0.1 on a PC that hasn't synced for about a month... and it is quite happily downloading the new blocks.

Unless you set the transaction as RBF (which it appears you did not) or you know a very friendly mining operation, your chances of getting another transaction confirmed prior to your original are pretty much non-existant.

Most nodes will reject any new transaction spending those same UTXOs due to the fact that an existing transaction spending them already exists (ie. rejection due to double spend).

This is a 100% a total scam.

I really hope you have not deposited any cash or bitcoin anywhere that these people told you to. If you did, you can be 110% sure that the money/coins are lost and you will not be able to recover any of it.

It's a similar situation to the "casino scam", where you get a "freeroll" and supposedly win 0.1 BTC but you have to deposit 0.01 BTC to activate your account so you can withdraw. This "creating a history" thing is totally bogus and unnecessary.

Out of curiosity... where did Electrum export your wallet backup to? Or were you using a copy of the 'actual' wallet file that you exported from the protected app folder using 'root' permissions?

When I select the "Export Backup" option on my phone it doesn't seem to do anything. I get no notification/'toast' message to say it's been exported, but I don't get any error messages either, it just switches back to the default wallet view (with Send/History/Receive tabs etc).

Is your MyNode setup with Tor?

When you are entering the MyNode Server IP into Electrum, which IP address are you using? Is it a "local" one (likely starts with 192.x.x.x) or the "external" IP address (should be what you see when you goto https://whatismyipaddress.com/ ) or is it an "hfjkdhsfjkahskfjhsakf.onion" type address?

If your MyNode (and the Electrum server) are using Tor, it might be causing the connectivity issue if your Electrum client is not also setup to use Tor (and/or you don't have a Tor client service setup properly).

DO NOT use an online web form to sign messages!!?!

Online webforms are "ok" for verifying messages, but you should NEVER EVER input your private key into a website. The reasons for why you should NEVER do this should be obvious.

As o_e_l_e_o has pointed out, if your wallet file is that badly corrupted then unless you have the seed backup + any extra words or a digital backup of the wallet file, then your chances of recovery are somewhere between zero and none.

Or put another way... they are not uniformly distributed. Given there is no mathematical proof for being able to confirm that any given range is "empty". You would need to search the entire range to be 100% you have found everything.

It's one of the fundamental concepts that provides the security of the system, by making it especially onerous in terms of computing power to be able to search everything... at least until someone travels back from the far future with really fancy quantum, or an as yet undiscovered type of, computing power and really screws up everything

 You must be new to the internet

Seriously tho, it's actually really difficult to get scam sites taken down a lot of the time... even 100% proven scams. Based on personal experience, about the only recourse you have is to complain to the DNS provider and/or webhost and hope that their complaints/abuse team care enough to do something about it

Honestly, I don't really fancy your chances... an XP machine that was reformatted to Win7 and then "used" for up to 2 years afterwards?

Also... that browser based version of PyWallet isn't really suitable for disk/image scanning for wallet files... it was more as a utility for working directly with known wallet.dat files.

If you're trying to scan the disk/image for possible files... you'll need to use the command line version.

Honestly... it should be. Regardless of how good you think your antivirus is, there will always be malware that it won't/can't trap.


Online wallets and security are two very different things... and in almost all situations are mutually exclusive.

You would be wise to heed the advice of o_e_l_e_o and the others.

That is indeed possible. However, depending on your actual requirements, may not be the best strategy.


The data stored in the wallet.dat is encrypted.


Note that while the actual format of the wallet.dat is published and "known"... it is a format that is pretty much exclusive to Bitcoin Core (and some of it's spinoffs like Bitcoin Knots). If you're concerned about the long term, you might want to consider other backup options (or perhaps other wallets).


Personally, I wouldn't go trying to create "clever" encryption systems... That often creates more issues than it solves.

Are you looking for the bitcoin directory where the actual Bitcoin Core executable (.exe) file is... or the bitcoin directory where the block data, debug.log and wallet data are stored?

Is that the total size of the hard disk, or the actual free space available?

As mentioned, the blockchain is currently nearing 500gigabytes... so unless you have at least 500 GB of free space... there is a chance your node is simply running out of storage space and is unable to download any more blocks.

Can I ask way?

I don't really see any issue with having the other types of addresses stored in your wallet... it's simple enough to add a label that says "do not use" if you're concerned about accidentally using the incorrect type.

At the end of the day, they're just different representations of the same private key.

The Android app version of Electrum is a subset of full Electrum functionality. It's more of a companion app than a full version of Electrum.

Having said that, it might be worth logging an issue/feature request on their GitHub to see if they would implement the feature you're after... or if anyone else has requested it and if it's in development.