Accidently send BTC to USDT address

[askarisyed]

Dear members,

On 15.01.17. In a moment of carelessness, I made a transaction of bitcoins (BTC) from my coinbase account to USDT address in Cryptopia. I realized my mistake but it was too late and the transaction cleared with 6+ confirmations in a couple of hours.



Transaction ID:  27ddeac780978f24d49b493cc9b6b819a6d819e2d9c406fd5f1673246da814f7
Output address: 1DJheE2EGZsyXRG8SfeTtivSgbezL34bGB

the address I sent my bitcoins to is:  1EqkMgZaR8vaPQJ1gHjbNY75Cp9k7i1L6T

I checked with transaction hash and transaction ID and it shows my BTC balance.

I am new here to cryptocurrencies and invested all money from credit.

Is there someone who can help me out here?

I heard one way to do it is to find the private key and export this key to another wallet.

1. How to I find the private key of my Cryptopia USDT wallet (where I transferred BTC)

I have contacted both supports but still no reply....is my hope lost?

[Xynerise]

All crypto wallets on Cryptopia belong to them and they will not give you the private key for whatsoever reason.
You'll have to wait for support to reply.
They may be able to recover it for you if they feel the amount is worth it.

PS exchanges have a lot of load so you may not be replied to quickly.

[TryNinja]

I heard one way to do it is to find the private key and export this key to another wallet.

1. How to I find the private key of my Cryptopia USDT wallet (where I transferred BTC)

You obviously can't. This method only works if you send BTC to a wallet you control. E.g: Electrum, Bitcoin Core, etc...
They may be able to recover your USDT. But they may also charge you a fee just like they do with deposits sent without a required payment id:

Due to an influx of tickets of this nature having a significant impact on our support capacity as we continue to grow and scale to meet demand, Cryptopia is now implementing a 10% recovery fee on support tickets involving recovery of deposits made to Cryptopia where a required PaymentId/Message/etc are not correctly included in the transaction.

Keep in mind that they are literally the only ones that can help you. If they don't answer your support ticket or deny your request, your BTC is gone.
Quick edit: oops... Swapped BTC with USDT. Thx DannyHamilton

[DannyHamilton]

If they don't answer your support ticket or deny your request, your USDT BTC is gone.

FTFY.

[BenOnceAgain]

Bech32 cannot come fast enough. We need addresses that can be easily distinguished from one another and will be rejected if you enter the wrong address for a given currency.

Too many coins all using the same address namespace is just an added layer to the adoption challenge.

[DannyHamilton]

Bech32 cannot come fast enough. We need addresses that can be easily distinguished from one another and will be rejected if you enter the wrong address for a given currency.

Too many coins all using the same address namespace is just an added layer to the adoption challenge.

Unfortunately, bech32 does not fix the problem of lazy developers.  When people create altcoins, they can (and will) just use the same addresses for their altcoins as bitcoin uses. The problem will still exist.

[xtraelv]

Dear members,

On 15.01.17. In a moment of carelessness, I made a transaction of bitcoins (BTC) from my coinbase account to USDT address in Cryptopia. I realized my mistake but it was too late and the transaction cleared with 6+ confirmations in a couple of hours.



Transaction ID:  27ddeac780978f24d49b493cc9b6b819a6d819e2d9c406fd5f1673246da814f7
Output address: 1DJheE2EGZsyXRG8SfeTtivSgbezL34bGB

the address I sent my bitcoins to is:  1EqkMgZaR8vaPQJ1gHjbNY75Cp9k7i1L6T

Their support is very slow in answering but they are trying their best. They have had phenomenal growth on the site.

There is a 10% fee for crosschain recoveries. Fee is only payable if he recovery is succesfull.

You can speed up the process by mentioning that you agree to the recovery fee (saves them having to ask you)

[TheBasta24]

You’re lucky if they give ur money back, most of exchanges just keep them

[Madeon]

How many BTC did you send?

[HighCommander]

Seems like there was already a response on Cryptopia forums with a link for a recovery process - https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/Forum/Thread/6507

Hopefully their support will be able to resolve this.

Personally, I think it would be smart to program wallets so that software would auto detect if you are sending it to proper address, to catch such a mistake before it becomes fatal. To take it a step further, a system would send smallest amount possible to that address and if transaction is successful, send the rest 99.99%.

How many BTC did you send?

OP included transaction ID:

Transaction ID:  27ddeac780978f24d49b493cc9b6b819a6d819e2d9c406fd5f1673246da814f7
Output address: 1DJheE2EGZsyXRG8SfeTtivSgbezL34bGB

the address I sent my bitcoins to is:  1EqkMgZaR8vaPQJ1gHjbNY75Cp9k7i1L6T

https://blockchain.info/address/1DJheE2EGZsyXRG8SfeTtivSgbezL34bGB

Amount is showing 0.7543611

[HCP]

Personally, I think it would be smart to program wallets so that software would auto detect if you are sending it to proper address, to catch such a mistake before it becomes fatal.

Which would require that different blockchains didn't use the same address formats... like BitcoinCash using identical address format to Bitcoin. In cases like that, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a software wallet to determine if the address is BitcoinCash or Bitcoin.

It would also require that other currencies stop "piggybacking" on other networks... like the way that USDT does (via Omni).

To take it a step further, a system would send smallest amount possible to that address and if transaction is successful, send the rest 99.99%.

Also, I'm not sure how you think this idea will help? For instance, for any given Bitcoin address, there is a "matching" BitcoinCash address. If I accidentally sent some Bitcoin to a BCH address, the transaction will be successful, regardless of whether or not anyone can actually access the private key for that address.

The small transaction confirms... the 99.99% transaction then gets sent anyway. All this idea would do is A. create more transactions (which we really don't need)... and B. cost users more in fees.

However, if BitcoinCash used an unique address format, then if one were to attempt to send BTC to BCH, it would fail as the address would be rejected.

[HighCommander]

Which would require that different blockchains didn't use the same address formats... like BitcoinCash using identical address format to Bitcoin. In cases like that, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a software wallet to determine if the address is BitcoinCash or Bitcoin.

Also, I'm not sure how you think this idea will help? For instance, for any given Bitcoin address, there is a "matching" BitcoinCash address. If I accidentally sent some Bitcoin to a BCH address, the transaction will be successful, regardless of whether or not anyone can actually access the private key for that address.

Huh. Didn't know that. Well that's not smart system design, imo. Okay, detecting right away based on the address isn't an option.  I have a book about bitcoin internals but haven't read it yet, hence I don't know such details.

The small transaction confirms... the 99.99% transaction then gets sent anyway. All this idea would do is A. create more transactions (which we really don't need)... and B. cost users more in fees.

However, if BitcoinCash used an unique address format, then if one were to attempt to send BTC to BCH, it would fail as the address would be rejected.

I agree, small transaction confirms isn't ideal at all. A bunch of extra transactions, fees(I hate fees, here comes again - bad design, imo). But hey, we are dealing with money here. If protocol is designed the way that one sends X amount and accidentally messes up the recipients address in the process and sends it, then what? Oh well, too bad it's your fault or your system's fault your money is gone, sorry you're stupid, come again. Let's face it, how do most people usually input addresses to which they send coins to, they copy and paste them, and just to "be safe" they check first 3-4 chars and last 3-4 chars so they match and then click send. Am I right?  I mean I am not saying this should work this way or that way, I am seeing there's an issue and there were instances in the past when people had same issue and it seems like there needs to be an improvement to the system.

[thorexs]

i think you have to wait technical support reply,its the best thing to do,

[HCP]

....Well that's not smart system design, imo.

No, it wasn't... but it was a deliberate move on behalf of the Bitcoin Cash developers. They were trying to become "THE" Bitcoin... so they left everything the same as Bitcoin except for the consensus rules around blocksize... and, thankfully, at the last minute... added in the 2-way replay protection.

Personally, I believe it was more of a political move than anything... but that's just my opinion.

I mean I am not saying this should work this way or that way, I am seeing there's an issue and there were instances in the past when people had same issue and it seems like there needs to be an improvement to the system.

Personally, I don't think the system needs to be improved... but that users need to be better educated and take more responsibility for their actions. A system like Bitcoin that has no "undo" functionality can be very unforgiving.

Everyone was always quick to hype "Be Your Own Bank" as a mantra for the financial freedom being promoted by Bitcoin... However, they conveniently ignored the fact that this should actually have said "Be Your Own Bank, and your own Security Department, and your own Risk and Analysis Department, and your own IT Department" etc.

People are very quick to blame "The System"™ for their own carelessness and mistakes. Take the time to double (or triple check) what you are doing before you press the "send" or "confirm" button.

[loopes]

Due to an influx of tickets of this nature having a significant impact on our support capacity as we continue to grow and scale to meet demand, Cryptopia is now implementing a 10% recovery fee on support tickets involving recovery of deposits made to Cryptopia where a required PaymentId/Message/etc are not correctly included in the transaction.

Keep in mind that they are literally the only ones that can help you. If they don't answer your support ticket or deny your request, your BTC is gone.
Quick edit: oops... Swapped BTC with USDT. Thx DannyHamilton

Fortunately he sent btc to usdt, if he send to other currency he will loss his money for his carelessness. There is an option to swap from btc to usdt in cryptopia when someone has been wrong to sent btc to usdt address.

[evgeshti]

If you sent bitcoin to another address, whether it's the address of bitcoin or yusdt, I think the issue of solving this problem is closed and you lost your money. at the time of sending, almost all the services issue a message that if the funds are sent to the wrong address, they will be lost and can not be recovered(((((

[BenOnceAgain]

Bech32 cannot come fast enough. We need addresses that can be easily distinguished from one another and will be rejected if you enter the wrong address for a given currency.

Too many coins all using the same address namespace is just an added layer to the adoption challenge.

Unfortunately, bech32 does not fix the problem of lazy developers.  When people create altcoins, they can (and will) just use the same addresses for their altcoins as bitcoin uses. The problem will still exist.

As far as I'm concerned, lazy developers that overlap their address space with Bitcoin are demonstrating a lack of concern about the funds that will eventually be conveyed on their blockchain.  But you're right, they'll do the absolute minimum. (sed -i 's/Bitcoin/Shitcoin/g' *)

Hey while I'm thinking of it, I had a question about the prefix on a bech32 address that wasn't apparent when I read the BIP.  Does the prefix have to exactly match, i.e. "bc1" or "tb1", for example?  Would either of these prefixes pass muster: "bc1xyzabc1" or "xyzabc1bc1"?  If so, which one is the proper one if you were to include additional human-readable information in the prefix?

If anyone knows the answer to that, I'd appreciate it.  Otherwise, I'll check out the code.

Best regards,
Ben

[Xynerise]

Hey while I'm thinking of it, I had a question about the prefix on a bech32 address that wasn't apparent when I read the BIP. Does the prefix have to exactly match, i.e. "bc1" or "tb1", for example?  Would either of these prefixes pass muster: "bc1xyzabc1" or "xyzabc1bc1"?  If so, which one is the proper one if you were to include additional human-readable information in the prefix?

If anyone knows the answer to that, I'd appreciate it.  Otherwise, I'll check out the code.

Best regards,
Ben

Yes, it does.
For segwit implementation in Btcoin, the hrp is "bc" for mainnet, and "tb" for testnet.
Then the separator is 1.

However for other implementations of Bech32 not related to bitcoin, you can use any 1 to 83 US-ASCII characters, with each character having a value in the range [33-126]

If you want to play around with Bech32 addresses, check out Nullius' segwit vanity address generator

[BenOnceAgain]

Hey while I'm thinking of it, I had a question about the prefix on a bech32 address that wasn't apparent when I read the BIP. Does the prefix have to exactly match, i.e. "bc1" or "tb1", for example?  Would either of these prefixes pass muster: "bc1xyzabc1" or "xyzabc1bc1"?  If so, which one is the proper one if you were to include additional human-readable information in the prefix?

If anyone knows the answer to that, I'd appreciate it.  Otherwise, I'll check out the code.

Best regards,
Ben

Yes, it does.
For segwit implementation in Btcoin, the hrp is "bc" for mainnet, and "tb" for testnet.
Then the separator is 1.

However for other implementations of Bech32 not related to bitcoin, you can use any 1 to 83 US-ASCII characters, with each character having a value in the range [33-126]

If you want to play around with Bech32 addresses, check out Nullius' segwit vanity address generator

Thank you very much for your response. Yes, I had reviewed the BIP and I was thrown off by one of the examples of invalid addresses:

Code:

separatoran84characterslonghumanreadablepartthatcontainsthenumber1andtheexcludedcharactersbio1569pvx: overall max length exceeded

I see now in the spec it states that if there's multiple separator "1" characters, the last one is considered the separator.  But for Bitcoin the addresses will begin with "bc" pre-separator.  If I'm reading the spec correctly, I think in the above example, besides the HRP length being exceeded, the data area must also be missing, as the "569pvx" is the checksum.

I am very impressed with the considerations that went into this address specification.  I've worked with DOD projects (IUID/UID) that did not take into account all of the real-world factors that have been addressed in this BIP.

I am going to clone Nullius' code and mess around with it.

Thanks again!

Ben

[u-partner]

Hi!

Unfortunately, There is no chance to get back a transaction! 
BTC Wallets no have any admins.