Bitcoin Forum
May 31, 2020, 01:03:43 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Mycelium finally releasing Segwit support this month?  (Read 139 times)
TryNinja
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 2223


Merit & Notifications bot: @BTTSuperNotifier_bot


View Profile
October 16, 2018, 05:16:56 PM
Merited by The Pharmacist (1)
 #1

I've found this screenshot on Reddit:



Here is a comment from giszmo on the same thread:

Quote
Yes, as we said again and again, we are working on a segwit release (under the lead of Sergey Lappo) and I just got permission to share some insights what our main road blocks are.

We support many account types and Mycelium has many features none of our current devs ever used for any real world purpose. We currently also lack Trezor Model T and Ledger Nano S to test with (we will shortly get those). How does SegWit play together with our local trader platform? How about [Shamir's Secret Sharing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir's_Secret_Sharing) (yes, Mycelium supports that. I don't know exactly how but I guess we should make sure not to break it in case any user has his fortune in this) or BitId (we know that for bech32, message signing is not well defined).

So, for the simplest of cases of creating a new HD wallet, SegWit works. I could record a demo or show your the transactions we created with our tests.
With Trezor One we ran into a UI issue that is quite interesting: Our approach is a mixed mode account. That means your receiving address will change from legacy to segwit compatibility with optional segwit native. (Terminology is another topic. Power users would maybe want to see bech32, BIP84/49/44, P2SH segwit, P2WKH_P2SH or something like that.) So when in a payment situation you can present your bech32 address to the payer and if his wallet doesn't recognize it, you can switch to p2sh with a simple click, without having to switch to a different account. Also when you pay a bech32 address, your change will go to a bech32 address to get more privacy. (If change should go to a legacy address when paying a legacy address is still up to debate. I think the current state is that it would go to p2sh instead.) Anyway, account mixing raises compatibility and standardization concerns. Trezor for example handles your bech32 account as a completely separate account from your legacy account. I can spend in mixed mode or from trezor's perspective from several accounts at a time but it gets confused about the change output and that has some scary consequences for Trezor users: If you spend from one account and the change goes into another of your accounts, the trezor will ask the user to confirm **sending** the change. It does indicate that the change would get sent to the trezor again but when paying $12 with my Trezor I get scared when I have to confirm sending $12000 to another address that I have never seen before even if it says "Trezor #1" below the address. So ... we have to see if Trezor has a good solution for that, how keepkey and Ledger deal with this, if we should reduce privacy on hardware wallets to keep support manageable, if we provide mixed mode as an opt-in for the more techy users etc.

So yes, we are working on it and we probably could release it shortly but to avoid scary moments for certain users we would probably have to polish the release a bit. We still have to test all features with the release candidate. And then there is code reviewing. It's +8500-5300 lines of code to review.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9omnv4/mycelium_wallet_will_finally_get_segwit_this/e7vlyqh/

And about the address scheme that will be used:

Quote
bc1 addresses will be part of the initial segwit release. your default receiving address will switch from legacy to p2sh and you can switch it manually to bech32.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/9omnv4/mycelium_wallet_will_finally_get_segwit_this/e7vmje6/

1590930223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1590930223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1590930223
Reply with quote  #2

1590930223
Report to moderator
1590930223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1590930223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1590930223
Reply with quote  #2

1590930223
Report to moderator
1590930223
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1590930223

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1590930223
Reply with quote  #2

1590930223
Report to moderator
FAST DICE GAME $500 DAILY CONTEST BEST AUTOBET MODE 30% RAKEBACK FOR VIPS PROVABLY FAIR Play Now Play Now
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2380
Merit: 2582


Welt Am Draht


View Profile
October 16, 2018, 05:52:35 PM
 #2

One of the world's most used wallets does not have a Trezor T or Ledger on hand to test with? Eh?

Good news all the same. I wonder how many people abandoned Mycelium because of lack of Segwit. I for one did not.


bob123
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1769



View Profile WWW
October 17, 2018, 03:47:21 PM
 #3

Finally.

Mycelium definitely was one of the best wallets around until other wallets were created with segwit support.
Since then, for me there wasn't any mobile wallet which was close to being perfect.

Supporting segwit is definitely a good first step, but i think there are still some features which would be very handy if they would reach a big userbase.

I am definitely looking forward to the segwit support, since this will have a real influence on the daily usage of BTC.

The Pharmacist
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 3513



View Profile
October 17, 2018, 04:04:18 PM
 #4

I wonder how many people abandoned Mycelium because of lack of Segwit. I for one did not.
I didn't abandon Mycelium because of the segwit issue but because of their network fee structure which doesn't allow you to completely adjust your sending fee.  It's been quite some time since I used Mycelium as my main wallet and I don't imagine they've fixed that issue.

And I agree, segwit support is a great thing for them to finally getting around to doing.  I've always liked everything about Mycelium--even without segwit--except for the damn network fee thing.  Maybe now fees will be consistently lower and I might start using it again. 

Thanks for posting the article, OP.

OmegaStarScream
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2030
Merit: 2012


Exchange Bitcoin quicky--https://blockchain.com.do


View Profile
December 17, 2018, 08:22:17 PM
 #5

I've spoke with the community manager multiple times on Telegram in the past and It was always the same answer "coming soon" whether it's SegWit or the SPV update where we could connect to our own nodes etc. so maybe this time is no different but let's hope for the best.

And I think the only reason why people didn't switch is because there is no better alternative when it comes to Android (at least not open source).

BitCryptex
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 952
Merit: 1389


Write @BitCryptex or quote my post to notify me


View Profile WWW
December 18, 2018, 06:53:56 PM
Last edit: December 18, 2018, 07:04:03 PM by BitCryptex
 #6

One of the world's most used wallets does not have a Trezor T or Ledger on hand to test with? Eh?

Trezor T was released not a long time ago so it's understandable but Ledger Nano S...? I have already tested the latest update with the Trezor model T and there are still a few bugs. Passphrases are not supported properly. The wallet requests passphrase too early (even Mycelium displays such error).

And I think the only reason why people didn't switch is because there is no better alternative when it comes to Android (at least not open source).

What about Samourai Wallet? What features does it lack? The only one I can think of right now is no support for hardware wallets.

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!