Sure, but I cannot store a private key in my head, so I need to store it at some place.
This is both:
a) An easily accessible pc for daily use (cold wallet ofc.)
b) A protected place (Paper in bank safe deposit box)

So I need additional password protection for my computer, which can otherwise be relatively easily stolen.
(Im talking lots of custody money, hence security must be close to 100%).

Thank you for your answer.
This is quite sad, as my primary focus is security. And while ledger / trezor etc. probably have quite a strong protection, its not trustless from my point of view (i have to plug in the device in an online pc and trust them to stay secure, trust them to have good entropy (not open sorce) and it can get stolen (has no strong password protection) ) + I dont know if they have something like fragmented paperbackups.
Armory is so nice, because the security is as perfect *and* trustless as it can be for someone without deep coding skills.

Electrum is Bitcoin-only, right?
If so, it does not fit my need since im looking for something for Ethereum/Ether.
As I said: For me, Armory is the perfect Bitcoin-Wallet, but I cant find a good solution for Ethereum.

Dear Community,

im looking for an armory-like ethereum wallet, specifically a wallet that I can run in a watch-only variant on the online PC,
and in an offline variant with the private keys on a second PC. It must be open source.
Which wallet can you recommend for this?

Armory is the perfect wallet for Bitcoin, unfortunately without support for Ethereum.

Thank you for your advice.

Dear,

is the software (armory) still maintained or updated?
So are there any plans to get 0.97 out? If so, any eta?

Thanks.

Armory 0.97: Is this project still being worked on? In this topics first post the eta is Q2 '19.
Can you give some update and background infos about it?

Dear,
I still have an old Armory Build (v. 0.93.3) installed on my Raspberry (for offline sign)
but i would like to update so it supports Segwit and all fixes like fragmented backup and so on.

Im not quite familiar with Linux in general so my questions are:

1) Is there any new Offline-Bundle available? At https://btcarmory.com/releases/  I can only find a Raspberry-Package for 93.3

2) How can I update without a new Packet and without an internet connection to the Raspberry? I tried to download the new Ubuntu-Release on an online computer and transport it with a usb-stick to the offline-Raspberry, but could not install it there...

Are you sure about that? I would have not expected this, so glad I asked bevor acting.

As it would be very difficult for me to create a new Wallet (because of the high security steps I took in order to properly have backups in different places) i guess i will install a bch-node and move my funds via armory. Still have to update my coldwallet then, but it might be the easier way.

Or is there any way i can run my online-armory against a bch-node on the internet? So that i dont need to sync a new node all day long.... I know, it has some loss in privacy included, but i'll take that.

EDIT: Btw: Where can I find the latest Raspberry-Offline version, including the bch-signer?

Hey everyone

I've come to the point where I want to access half of my portfolio, including BTC, BCH and BTG.
As all of my funds still sit in an old Raspberry Pi - Coldwallet with Armory, and my Online Computer only runs against a Bitcoin Core Node, so I consider doing it this way:
1) Send the BTC to the target Address (Exchange).
2) Export the Private Key and Import them somewhere, so i can spend the BCH without running a BCH-Node.
3) Doing the same with BTG.

My questions are the following:
a) Does it damage the security of my Armory-wallet by exporting some Private Keys? (In other words: Is it possible in any way that someone could calculate my seed with some of my private keys?) (Ofc. I am aware, that i can not use this single address anymore!)
b) What is the best/easiest way to import my Priv Keys so that i can spend the BCH/BTG?
c) anything you could add / recommend about this plan?

Have tested it with my own Armory Wallet: Got the same problem, but could fix it easily by clicking on "Signer: Default" and selecting the "c++" signer manually in the transaction-review field (just bevor you have to enter your passphrase).

Just to get it right: If I use an RaPi as a coldwallet to sign tx, that are made with a watch-only hot-wallet on my online pc, just the online-version has to be up-to-date, right? The RaPi can stay 0.93 forever, correct? I guess i cant use the advantages of segwit transactions then, but thats not so important for long-term holdings.

Any estimated time to a final 0.96 release yet?
Ty for all your work btw

Hey, just a short question:
Can I use the "recovery wallet" function and enter some lines of which i have created my self to create my own entropy and do not have to trust armory in that case?
I know, this is on my own risk then, if im stupid enough to enter some pseudo-entropy its my own fault. Just wanna know if this might be a possibility if i create them by dices or so...

EDIT: just saw that in the menu of "create wallet" i can find a button "add manual entropy", but then again i have to trust armory that it actually use this "manual entropy". But if i just enter my own lines in the recovery function, it has to, right? So if i would not trust it, it would be the better option.... (just in case Im somewhat paranoid  )

Seems correct, gonna check it out now. Thanks so far

Edit 1: Yes, it is working! Thank you very much again!!

Tried that too, was not working.
But ive got it now, it is  step2 := base58.Decode(step1) and u have to include  "github.com/conformal/btcutil/base58" instead.

Next problem: the wire-package was moved to the the btcd package, so
step5 := btcwire.DoubleSha256(step3)
fmt.Printf("4/5 - Double SHA-256 hash of 3: %x\n", step5)

isnt working anymore. Im looking for the DoubleSha256 func in the btcd/wire dictionary, but i cant find it...

Seems like the Library at github.com/conformal/btcutil changed something.
First off,   "github.com/btcsuite/btcutil" seems to be correct now, but then again its not working.
Can you confirm that this is working just this way for you (on windows?) I know, windows sucks, but
as i said im not a programmer so i have to work with what i have

Edit: concrete, i get this error:
.\test.go:12: undefined: btcutil.Base58Decode

Edit2: If i change "btcutil.Base58Decode" to "btcutli.DecodeWIF" I get the error
.\test.go:12: multiple-value btcutil.DecodeWIF() in single-value context

Hi there, im not a programmer, so i need your help to update this code for me, as it is not working anymore.
Would be really nice if someone could invest a couple of minutes, as this should not take you too long.
Written in Go:

-------------------------------------
*START*
-------------------------------------
package main

import (
   "fmt"
   "github.com/conformal/btcutil"
   "github.com/conformal/btcwire"
)

func main() {
   step1 := "5HueCGU8rMjxEXxiPuD5BDku4MkFqeZyd4dZ1jvhTVqvbTLvyTJ"
   fmt.Printf("1 - Wallet import format: %s\n", step1)

   step2 := btcutil.Base58Decode(step1)
   fmt.Printf("2 - Converting WIF as Base58 string to byte array: %x\n", step2)

   step3 := step2[:len(step2)-4]
   fmt.Printf("3 - Dropping last 4 checksum bytes from 2: %x\n", step3)

   step5 := btcwire.DoubleSha256(step3)
   fmt.Printf("4/5 - Double SHA-256 hash of 3: %x\n", step5)

   fmt.Printf("6 - First 4 bytes of 5, this is the calculated checksum: %x\n", step5[:4])

   step7 := step2[len(step2)-4:]
   fmt.Printf("7 - Take the last 4 bytes of 2, this is the original checksum: %x\n", step7)
}


And the result of running that program:

1 - Wallet import format: 5HueCGU8rMjxEXxiPuD5BDku4MkFqeZyd4dZ1jvhTVqvbTLvyTJ
2 - Converting WIF as Base58 string to byte array: 800c28fca386c7a227600b2fe50b7cae11ec86d3bf1fbe471be89827e19d72aa1d507a5b8d
3 - Dropping last 4 checksum bytes from 2: 800c28fca386c7a227600b2fe50b7cae11ec86d3bf1fbe471be89827e19d72aa1d
4/5 - Double SHA-256 hash of 3: 507a5b8dfed0fc6fe8801743720cedec06aa5c6fca72b07c49964492fb98a714
6 - First 4 bytes of 5, this is the calculated checksum: 507a5b8d
7 - Take the last 4 bytes of 2, this is the original checksum: 507a5b8d

-------------------------------------
*END*
-------------------------------------

Thats good for me ))

Doesn't have to mean the same. I also follow every rule of law even if i do not like them...

A little OT but very short question:
Are you (goatpig) in favor of Segwit / Neutral / in favor of BU ?
I have my own opinion, but also wanna hear from someone who actually has knowledge about code and stuff.
If u have the time you can comment on your opinion, or just give the answer without any explanation.