Apologies for coming in late, but I'm a bit confused as to what the exact issue is here... You can connect the Trezor to your computer and it is recognised, but you are unable to get Electrum to show your Trezor wallet correctly?

Can you confirm that you're using Electrum v2.9.3?

Can you provide the TransactionID? I'd like to check to see if your transaction has actually propagated properly...

It's quite possible you could just "import" your private keys rather than "sweeping" them... which would get around the mempool conflict error, but if the transaction still exists (it's quite possible that MBC is rebroadcasting your transaction) then you still wouldn't be able to send a new transaction anyway...

Ahhhh I see what has happened

BitcoinABC is finding the amounts sent to the "change addresses" from the two transactions and showing those as "sent"... MultiBit is "hiding" this as these change addresses are in the MultiBit wallet, so MBHD is showing the "effective" amount sent (ie. Input - Change)

In this transaction: b13af4f4ace7283a13dc98ea858f5a18fdd9625831a389f8c23cbe477dbd9289

You used a 1 BTC input:
1MTpePZja5eHmeThBsqvqzNA3kTC9kww6e (1 BTC)

and sent 0.02 to this address:
1Lp972rBgoaVZcNcQjehjdj6PH16r21dw8 - (Unspent) 0.02 BTC

This, created change of 0.9799 which it deposited here:
17z53gDzUvzEyi5endgaZX9c1Ewz92StyA - (Unspent) 0.9799 BTC

So the "effective" amount sent is 1 - 0.9799 = 0.0201 BTC

---

In the second transaction: c4dc402ba3463dfa7be8428a2c4c02dd53e2276e14bf2be8d58bec6ed9099a00

You used a 2 BTC input:
1MTpePZja5eHmeThBsqvqzNA3kTC9kww6e (2 BTC - Output)

and I'm assuming you actually sent 0.01 to:
1L1jtgiafSHyTuSzDfiAjB2qARRNTFauLx - (Unspent) 0.01 BTC

and generated change of 1.9899:
1MAVL1idU4SqdAQ3JMtqDfRMvPgagrccPy - (Spent) 1.9899 BTC


So the "effective" amount sent is 2 - 1.9899 = 0.0101 BTC

---

BitcoinABC is showing the change amounts as "sent" as I suspect you've only imported the "receive" address private keys... you need to import your "change" address private keys... and then those 1.9899 and 0.9799 amounts will no longer show as "sent"... and will be properly included in your balance.

You need to use the "Custom" BIP32 Derivation Path of m/0'/1 in the BIP39 standalone tool to see your MBHD change addresses... Also, You shouldn't need to import 160K keys ... just look through until you find the addresses:

17z53gDzUvzEyi5endgaZX9c1Ewz92StyA and 1MAVL1idU4SqdAQ3JMtqDfRMvPgagrccPy


Personally, I would have thought that just importing the seed to ElectronCash (Note: use the BIP39 option, and derivation path of m/0' ) would have been the easier option... but that's your choice

Because bitcoinarmory.com is no longer the "official" site... ATI is no longer responsible for Armory and hasn't been for over a year now.

The official site is now: https://btcarmory.com

It would probably be useful if the old site was taken down or a notice put up or a redirect put in... but I suspect it never happened because "reasons"...

Does your 2FA wallet have a lot of transactions in it? Like hundreds of transactions or only a few transactions? It is also possible that the ElectronCash server that your ElectronCash client is connected to is having some issues... so, maybe try changing the server.

Note: You may need to just create a "dummy" wallet so you can actually get into ElectronCash and go into "Tools -> Network" and set the server manually... try the bcc.arihanc.com one

From a technical point of view... there shouldn't be any issue with having Electrum and ElectronCash on the same machine... as they use different data directories (unlike BitcoinCore and BitcoinABC)...

From a security point of view... it would probably be smart to move all your BTC out of Electrum before you import your seed/keys into ElectronCash... but so far, there haven't been any security issues with the "real" ElectronCash client... just make sure you get it from the official website www.electroncash.org

Using a VM or a live distro CD/USB is also an option.

Or people could stop being lazy and expect everything to be spoon-fed to them...

Google exists for a reason... there are literally dozens of webpages and the odd video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Go7CBYWosLc windows, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7vboUn3ahI Mac) that explain what the signatures are for and/or how to go about using them to verify that a file is legit...

If people are so concerned about their "$$$", then maybe they should educate themselves and stop being "computer software illiterates". If you have enough time to log onto btctalk and moan about not knowing how to do something and insult people for not dropping everything they're doing to help you, you have enough time to use Google and your brain and go and learn something. Did you do ANYTHING in the 21 hours between your posts to investigate PGP signatures and how they're used to verify files?

"Be your own bank" also implies "Be your own security team"


Besides, checking the signatures is not even mandatory... it is recommended, but isn't required to be able to use Electrum.

Also, as a side note...
Insulting the people you are asking for assistance, probably isn't the best way to get the assistance you desire... #justSaying

0.96 or 0.96.1?? Get the latest version here: https://btcarmory.com/0.96.1-release/

Doesn't compromise the wallet... may compromise your privacy a tiny amount (it may contain your computer username in directory paths)...

You'll need to post your logs (dblog.txt and armorylog.txt files in the Armory data directory)... copy/paste the contents of those files to pastebin.com and then post the links here.

Glad you got it working... honestly, the b.info wallet is so full of issues... I know they're trying to make things "easy" but they've dumbed down so much stuff and just plain broken other things that it just causes so many issues

Their old "dynamic" fee structure just put 120 sats/byte for every transaction, so during the last fee spike the majority of "unconfirmed for XX hours/days" threads were all b.info users... now it has become obvious that their system is giving out the wrong the address/private key pairs when you export them... it's giving an uncompressed address with a compressed key

By double authentication, do you mean 2FA? If so, I don't think you can use just the master public key... as a 2FA has three different master public keys which are all combined as part of the MultiSig system.

It's possible you'll be able to recover the funds, but only if the master public key you used for the watching wallet is related to one of the two master private keys (xprivs) that your 2FA seed will be able to restore. If it is paired with the master private key that TrustedCoin hold, then you're going to have to contact them to try and recover the funds...

Ok... I'm fairly sure the issue is probably the whole b.info compressed/uncompressed key thing... (b.info is doing some sort of conversion behind the scenes... and the private key it spits out is a compressed key, but the address is the address for the uncompressed key)

Download and run an offline copy of bitaddress.org... goto "wallet details" tab, put your private key in and click "view details"

Do you see your 1CbbvF4AEtnkavWXrioemgjMYb86B4Po8X address? If so, try importing the WIF key listed on the same side as your "1Cbbv" address...

No... It isn't a change address

You have a 2FA wallet, so you need to pay TrustedCoin for providing the 2FA service. You either prepay and get credits (likely 100 transactions for your 0.01 btc at a rate of 0.0001/transaction) or you can "pay as you go" but at a higher rate of 0.0005/transaction.

Click the little blue shield icon in the bottom right corner of Electrum window for more info...



Note: Be careful what you click on that screen, as it won't clear you selection unless you click the "clear all" button on the send tab. Several users have accidentally bought 100 credits for 0.01 btc in recent months

Have you considered using Google at all?

"Hard drive encryption windows"

or

"Hard drive encryption Linux"

or

"Trezor altcoins"

or

"Ledger nano s altcoins"

At the moment, pretty much every wallet that utilises seed mnemonics are using the same 2048 words as specified in the BIP39: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0039/bip-0039-wordlists.md

It is possible to use different languages, but pretty much every wallet I've seen uses English by default. Not sure if that is related to my system settings or the way the wallets work.


Testing for 2 missing words is pretty trivial... It's only 2048*2048 = 4,194,304 combinations...

I've written a python script which allows testing for this to help another user who was missing a word... The script found the right word in a matter of minutes... And that was without knowing the location of the missing word in a 24 word mnemonic

Yes, you need to have Bitcoin Core installed and fully synced to properly use Armory.

Without Core, Armory has no block or transaction data to work with and no way to broadcast transactions to the network.

Can you provide some TXIDs... It's very hard to understand what the issue is without being able to see actual transactions.

It's simply not possible for the amounts to be magically multiplied... They use the same blockchain history up until the fork, so the numbers in BTC and BCH have to be identical.

Fairly sure it doesn't lock out after a certain number of tries...

You can always just make multiple backups of the wallet file before you attempt to try different passwords, just in case

Without the password, there is really no way to regain access to your coins. So, you will have to try "cracking" the password using something like btcrecover or maybe get in contact with Dave at walletrecoveryservices.com

Other options are "John the Ripper" or hashcat... Although I'm not sure if they're compatible with MultiBit Classic... I've never tried either.

If you look at the bottom right corner of the Bitcoin Core window, do you see the HD icon?


If you do, it is an HD wallet... If you don't, it's an "old style" keystore wallet.

Also, an HD wallet will return "hdmasterkeyid" when you use the "getwalletinfo"...

It is a total fallacy that only criminals use Bitcoin and Bitcoin mixers... It is just FUD being spread by "enforcement" agencies concerned that their job is being made harder.

They are attempting to paint Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency as the devil to convince law makers to give them all sorts of extra powers...

The 1% get a bit nervous when the peons find new ways to circumvent their systems (fiat banking) and start to discover ways to cut them out of the loop.

Besides, if everyone is using a mixer, are they going to accuse everyone of being a criminal? We'd all be much "safer" if everyone used anonymizing services... They can't arrest everyone