Nano s used unconfirmed change from previous tx as input to new send tx

[jbreher]

So I am a n00b as regarding as Ledger nano s operations. I am transitioning from an Armory Offline solution for my cold storage to Ledger. I hit a stumbling block, and seek info.

Yesterday, I funded an exchange account with a send from Ledger. I used the standard fee as suggested by nano. Unfortunately, it was not enough for quick processing. Fair enough, my bad.

Today, seeing the tx did not go through, I created another tx to the same send address. IOW, once both the previous tx and this one clear, I will have double the amount sent in either single tx. I used the high fee option presented by nano. My expectation was that this tx would clear promptly, and the first tx would process at some later time.

I checked the new tx on blockchain.info. Imagine my surprise when I saw that nano used the change output from the first unconfirmed tx as one of the inputs to the new tx! 

Is there some way to configure nano to prevent this from happening?
A setting to just plain prevent this?
A setting to issue a warning requiring confirmation before this can occur?
Coin control options so I can select which inputs will go into any given tx?

[1713961185]

1713961185

[1713961185]

1713961185

[1713961185]

1713961185

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

If you post or pm me the unconfirmed txids in question I will push them for you and clear this up in a few hours.

[jbreher]

If you post or pm me the unconfirmed txids in question I will push them for you and clear this up in a few hours.

Thanks BitcoinNewsMagazine. I truly appreciate the offer.

But as by happenstance, both txs have now cleared. Interestingly, both in the same block. (?!)

However, my questions remain. Is there a way to prevent nano s from doing this?

[jackg]

If you post or pm me the unconfirmed txids in question I will push them for you and clear this up in a few hours.

Thanks BitcoinNewsMagazine. I truly appreciate the offer.

But as by happenstance, both txs have now cleared. Interestingly, both in the same block. (?!)

However, my questions remain. Is there a way to prevent nano s from doing this?

What software were you using with the ledger? If it was electrum then it's somewhere in the preferences there is a setting that says "spend unconfirmed outputs" that you need to uncheck.

If the second transaction fee was a regular fee or higher then they'll both get confirmed at the same time for the miner to get the most profits.

EDIT: it's in tools>preferences>and "spend only confirmed coins" should do the trick.

[jbreher]

If you post or pm me the unconfirmed txids in question I will push them for you and clear this up in a few hours.

Thanks BitcoinNewsMagazine. I truly appreciate the offer.

But as by happenstance, both txs have now cleared. Interestingly, both in the same block. (?!)

However, my questions remain. Is there a way to prevent nano s from doing this?

What software were you using with the ledger?

Thanks for your reply. The official Ledger Chrome app.

If it was electrum

!?!?!? Why would I use Electrum!? I mean, I get that one can use the same seed for both. But putting it on an internet-connected computer seems insane to me. At least for substantial values. Which is what I am talking about here.

then it's somewhere in the preferences there is a setting that says "spend unconfirmed outputs" that you need to uncheck.

If the second transaction fee was a regular fee or higher then they'll both get confirmed at the same time for the miner to get the most profits.

EDIT: it's in tools>preferences>and "spend only confirmed coins" should do the trick.

Cool. Yeah, I used Electrum to sweep my keys one-by-one from my previous Armory offline cold storage solution, and send them one-by-one to nano. Been using Electrum for trivial usages for years. I have that down.

Any way to do coin control (or any of the other needs I enumerate above) in the native Ledger Chrome app?

[jackg]

If you post or pm me the unconfirmed txids in question I will push them for you and clear this up in a few hours.

Thanks BitcoinNewsMagazine. I truly appreciate the offer.

But as by happenstance, both txs have now cleared. Interestingly, both in the same block. (?!)

However, my questions remain. Is there a way to prevent nano s from doing this?

What software were you using with the ledger?

Thanks for your reply. The official Ledger Chrome app.

If it was electrum

!?!?!? Why would I use Electrum!? I mean, I get that one can use the same seed for both. But putting it on an internet-connected computer seems insane to me. At least for substantial values. Which is what I am talking about here.

then it's somewhere in the preferences there is a setting that says "spend unconfirmed outputs" that you need to uncheck.

If the second transaction fee was a regular fee or higher then they'll both get confirmed at the same time for the miner to get the most profits.

EDIT: it's in tools>preferences>and "spend only confirmed coins" should do the trick.

Cool. Yeah, I used Electrum to sweep my keys one-by-one from my previous Armory offline cold storage solution, and send them one-by-one to nano. Been using Electrum for trivial usages for years. I have that down.

Any way to do coin control (or any of the other needs I enumerate above) in the native Ledger Chrome app?

NO. I noticed lots of people use electrum. It creates a watching only wallet using the public key handed to it from ledger and creates a transaction in raw form that the ledger can then sign.

I see no mention in your OP of using a Chrome app to do this and am unsure why you did not know you can do this in electrum.

Or did you enjoy exposing your private keys to chrome already? (hint: that doesn't happen either). I mean I should've joined the dots there and realised that someone would buy a ledger to sweep its private keys stright into electrum.

[jbreher]

NO. I noticed lots of people use electrum. It creates a watching only wallet using the public key handed to it from ledger and creates a transaction in raw form that the ledger can then sign.

Aha! Another piece of the puzzle - thanks. As a Ledger n00b, I've not quite fit all the pieces together as of yet.

The available official documentation on nano s is either sketchy, or poorly organized. I have not yet hit on this possibility on their website. It seems they are focused on their proprietary Chrome app. As such, I merely assumed that app to be full-featured.

Similarly, I have not seen how to create a watch-only wallet for import to Electrum from a given Ledger seed. Can you point me to a description for such?

[jackg]

NO. I noticed lots of people use electrum. It creates a watching only wallet using the public key handed to it from ledger and creates a transaction in raw form that the ledger can then sign.

Aha! Another piece of the puzzle - thanks. As a Ledger n00b, I've not quite fit all the pieces together as of yet.

The available official documentation on nano s is either sketchy, or poorly organized. I have not yet hit on this possibility on their website. It seems they are focused on their proprietary Chrome app. As such, I merely assumed that app to be full-featured.

Similarly, I have not seen how to create a watch-only wallet for import to Electrum from a given Ledger seed. Can you point me to a description for such?

Ahhh. I retract my previous comments then.
I think like everything else with electrum, it's pretty self explanetory and the software gives you a lot of information.
It is quite strange that ledger would point you to that, as I see it, electrum probably works better.

I found this topic which looks quite informative, it is from a few months ago so not sure how useful it is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1860569.0

As a side note, it may currently be impossible to put it on electrum if you're using segwit addresses instead of legacy addresses.
If you coins are in a legacy address you should find that it should work well.
Once electrum is downloaded from electrum.org/#download all you need to do is run it, select "Use a Hardware Device" and it shoud search for your wallet. It shouldn't even need any authorisation from the ledger when you start it as all it needs is the unencrypted data - mainly the public key.

If you do this it's useful to keep your chrome add-on just in case but eectrum proably has a lot more features (or is at least easier to handle as its open source and has at least 4 main developers - I think).

[BitcoinNewsMagazine]

So I am a n00b as regarding as Ledger nano s operations. I am transitioning from an Armory Offline solution for my cold storage to Ledger. I hit a stumbling block, and seek info.

Yesterday, I funded an exchange account with a send from Ledger. I used the standard fee as suggested by nano. Unfortunately, it was not enough for quick processing. Fair enough, my bad.

Today, seeing the tx did not go through, I created another tx to the same send address. IOW, once both the previous tx and this one clear, I will have double the amount sent in either single tx. I used the high fee option presented by nano. My expectation was that this tx would clear promptly, and the first tx would process at some later time.

I checked the new tx on blockchain.info. Imagine my surprise when I saw that nano used the change output from the first unconfirmed tx as one of the inputs to the new tx! 

Is there some way to configure nano to prevent this from happening?
A setting to just plain prevent this?
A setting to issue a warning requiring confirmation before this can occur?
Coin control options so I can select which inputs will go into any given tx?

All you can do in the Ledger Bitcoin app is go to coin control under settings and set the number of confirmations before spending from 1 to 6. The wallet itself should not spend unconfirmed inputs. Could be a bug: perhaps report the problem to Ledger Support by opening a ticket.

[jbreher]

So I am a n00b as regarding as Ledger nano s operations. I am transitioning from an Armory Offline solution for my cold storage to Ledger. I hit a stumbling block, and seek info.

Yesterday, I funded an exchange account with a send from Ledger. I used the standard fee as suggested by nano. Unfortunately, it was not enough for quick processing. Fair enough, my bad.

Today, seeing the tx did not go through, I created another tx to the same send address. IOW, once both the previous tx and this one clear, I will have double the amount sent in either single tx. I used the high fee option presented by nano. My expectation was that this tx would clear promptly, and the first tx would process at some later time.

I checked the new tx on blockchain.info. Imagine my surprise when I saw that nano used the change output from the first unconfirmed tx as one of the inputs to the new tx! 

Is there some way to configure nano to prevent this from happening?
A setting to just plain prevent this?
A setting to issue a warning requiring confirmation before this can occur?
Coin control options so I can select which inputs will go into any given tx?

All you can do in the Ledger Bitcoin app is go to coin control under settings and set the number of confirmations before spending from 1 to 6. The wallet itself should not spend unconfirmed inputs. Could be a bug: perhaps report the problem to Ledger Support by opening a ticket.

Yeah...about that...
It was already set to 6 confirmations when it tried to spend the chainge from an unconfirmed transaction it had created.

[jbreher]

Ahhh. I retract my previous comments then.
I think like everything else with electrum, it's pretty self explanetory and the software gives you a lot of information.
It is quite strange that ledger would point you to that, as I see it, electrum probably works better.

I found this topic which looks quite informative, it is from a few months ago so not sure how useful it is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1860569.0

As a side note, it may currently be impossible to put it on electrum if you're using segwit addresses instead of legacy addresses.
If you coins are in a legacy address you should find that it should work well.
Once electrum is downloaded from electrum.org/#download all you need to do is run it, select "Use a Hardware Device" and it shoud search for your wallet. It shouldn't even need any authorisation from the ledger when you start it as all it needs is the unencrypted data - mainly the public key.

If you do this it's useful to keep your chrome add-on just in case but eectrum proably has a lot more features (or is at least easier to handle as its open source and has at least 4 main developers - I think).

Thanks. Given that I have an existing Electrum wallet that exists outside any knowledge of nano, do I surmise that I create a new wallet in electrum, and point _that_ at the ledger?

I need to think through whether I want my cold storage -- even if unable to transact without the nano -- visible on a day-to-day computer.

[HCP]

In Electrum... Simply do the following:
1. "File" - "New/Restore"
2. Give it a new name
3. "Standard wallet"
4. "Use a hardware device"
5. Connect Ledger and start Bitcoin "app"

Electrum will read the Master PUBLIC key only from the ledger and create a "watching only" wallet...

This wallet can be opened and viewed without the Nano being connected. You can even create transactions, you just can't sign them.

If you're worried about keeping this wallet on an online PC... Remember that Electrum allows setting a wallet password and encrypting the wallet file (uses AES256 encryption)... So, even if your password file is stolen, it should be "safeish" if you use a relatively strong password... And without the private keys, at worst you'll lose some privacy.

As for your original "coin control" query, you'd need to check with Ledger support... It might be that the "minimum confirmation" setting only applies to inbound transactions and not change? If true, I'm not sure if that is by design or an oversight/bug... Worth following up though!

[jackg]

Ahhh. I retract my previous comments then.
I think like everything else with electrum, it's pretty self explanetory and the software gives you a lot of information.
It is quite strange that ledger would point you to that, as I see it, electrum probably works better.

I found this topic which looks quite informative, it is from a few months ago so not sure how useful it is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1860569.0

As a side note, it may currently be impossible to put it on electrum if you're using segwit addresses instead of legacy addresses.
If you coins are in a legacy address you should find that it should work well.
Once electrum is downloaded from electrum.org/#download all you need to do is run it, select "Use a Hardware Device" and it shoud search for your wallet. It shouldn't even need any authorisation from the ledger when you start it as all it needs is the unencrypted data - mainly the public key.

If you do this it's useful to keep your chrome add-on just in case but eectrum proably has a lot more features (or is at least easier to handle as its open source and has at least 4 main developers - I think).

Thanks. Given that I have an existing Electrum wallet that exists outside any knowledge of nano, do I surmise that I create a new wallet in electrum, and point _that_ at the ledger?

I need to think through whether I want my cold storage -- even if unable to transact without the nano -- visible on a day-to-day computer.

HCP's guide above is quite a good one → follow that!

I think there was a hidden question in your post, electrum can handle up to 5 wallets for instant access. Just click file>"wallets" and you can navigate between them.
You can have an unlimited number of wallets (though I really wouldn't suggest this as once it gets over five, you'd have to go to file>"new/restore" and enter the name of the wallet you want to go to).