New user here, not sure if I should trust Electrum...reason being:

[pcnetguru]

The wallet addresses it gives me do NOT appear on any of the popular bitcoin blockchain explorers. They only appear on Blockstream.

Any ideas? My concern is that my funds will be lost if I use it.

Any idea why the wallet addresses don't appear on the popular blockchain explorers?

[1715576497]

1715576497

[1715576497]

1715576497

[1715576497]

1715576497

[50 Cent]

fine for me. you can do like this :
https://www.blockchain.com/id/btc/address/"YOUR ADDRESS"
replace "YOUR ADDRESS" there

[TryNinja]

The wallet addresses it gives me do NOT appear on any of the popular bitcoin blockchain explorers. They only appear on Blockstream.

Any ideas? My concern is that my funds will be lost if I use it.

Any idea why the wallet addresses don't appear on the popular blockchain explorers?

Let me guess... Your address starts with bc1...?

It's a Native Segwit address (Bech32) which isn't supported by many block explorers (thus, it shows as invalid). However, the address is valid and works fine. If you receive coins on it, you can spend them without any issue.

The problem is that - as I said - they still aren't supported by many services. So you can create a new wallet but select "Standard" instead of "Segwit" for the wallet type. This should give you an wallet with 1... addresses.

[DireWolfM14]

Like TryNinja said, you probably just have a bech32 segwit address.  There are a couple block explorers that support bech32 addresses: btc.com, blockchair.com, and as you've discovered, blockstream.

If you're concerned about the authenticity of your Electrum download, remember; only download from electrum.org.  And, learn to verify the download.  

[pooya87]

before you start trusting Electrum, any other wallet, block explorers,... you first have to start educating yourself about bitcoin. how it works. and all the basics of it specifically the security part about how to stay safe downloading a wallet, keeping your secrets safe,...
you seem to have jumped in and as others explained are confused about a simple thing which is the new address format which is not supported in some block explorers that are lazy to upgrade their software!

[pcnetguru]

The wallet addresses it gives me do NOT appear on any of the popular bitcoin blockchain explorers. They only appear on Blockstream.

Any ideas? My concern is that my funds will be lost if I use it.

Any idea why the wallet addresses don't appear on the popular blockchain explorers?

Let me guess... Your address starts with bc1...?

It's a Native Segwit address (Bech32) which isn't supported by many block explorers (thus, it shows as invalid). However, the address is valid and works fine. If you receive coins on it, you can spend them without any issue.

The problem is that - as I said - they still aren't supported by many services. So you can create a new wallet but select "Standard" instead of "Segwit" for the wallet type. This should give you an wallet with 1... addresses.

What happens if a SegWit address sends BTC to a legacy wallet address (and vice versa)?

And...Are people able to create NEW legacy wallet addresses? Or are they only able to restore legacy wallets that were created before the SegWit update?

[Lucius]

What happens if a SegWit address sends BTC to a legacy wallet address (and vice versa)?

And...Are people able to create NEW legacy wallet addresses? Or are they only able to restore legacy wallets that were created before the SegWit update?

There are two type of SegWit address, one that you have start with bc1 and Electrum create such address if you select SegWit. As others say you can have some problem with such address because some exchanges / other services not support that address format. They support SegWit P2SH Nested address which start with 3, and with few tricks you can create such address in Electrum, check this thread.

You can send from SegWit to legacy address and back without any problem, and you can create new wallet in Electrum with legacy address start with 1 even if you create SegWit address before.

[jackg]

What happens if a SegWit address sends BTC to a legacy wallet address (and vice versa)?

And...Are people able to create NEW legacy wallet addresses? Or are they only able to restore legacy wallets that were created before the SegWit update?

You may want to create a wallet that's legacy and one that's segwit.

Exchanges with a lazy/risky setup are the issue mainly. A lot of products that use bitcoin accept nested segwit addresses and potentially even more than have been publicly listed since the recent vulnerabilities with bitcoin core.

The legitimate exchanges that you send a nested segwit transaction to (from the address beginning with bc1) will be able to add your funds manually within a few days after contacting support.

[DireWolfM14]

What happens if a SegWit address sends BTC to a legacy wallet address (and vice versa)?

Electrum doesn't care one way or the other.  If you have a legacy Electrum wallet, and a segwit Electrum wallet you can send from one to the other, either direction, without any issues.  

As others have stated; many exchanges and online wallets are not compatible with segwit addresses.  Some of these online wallets will accept payment from segwit addresses without issue, but will not be able to send to a segwit address.  The only exchange I use regularly is Coinbase, and they only recently implemented segwit support.

And...Are people able to create NEW legacy wallet addresses? Or are they only able to restore legacy wallets that were created before the SegWit update?

You can still create a new legacy wallet with Electrum.  

[HCP]

What happens if a SegWit address sends BTC to a legacy wallet address (and vice versa)?

You can send from a "bc1" addresses to any type of address (legacy or segwit) just fine... the *ONLY* issue with "bc1" addresses is that some wallets and online services do not yet recognise "bc1" addresses as being valid bitcoin addresses. So, if you attempt to withdraw coins from "StupidExchange" to your "bc1" address, the StupidExchange will refuse and say your address is invalid

In this instance, you would need to either... use a "nested" SegWit (aka P2SH-P2WPKH) address... these start with a "3" and are backwards compatible... all wallets and services should be able to send to this address... or you would just use an old legacy address (starts with a 1).

And...Are people able to create NEW legacy wallet addresses? Or are they only able to restore legacy wallets that were created before the SegWit update?

Yes, you can still create any type of address/wallet that you want... Legacy ("1-type"), Nested SegWit ("3-type") or Native SegWit ("bc1" aka bech32)... assuming of course that your wallet software or provider supports that address type.

Electrum has ways to create all 3... so does Bitcoin Core... some only support Legacy and Nested.

The legitimate exchanges that you send a nested segwit transaction to (from the address beginning with bc1) will be able to add your funds manually within a few days after contacting support.

That should be "native"

And it shouldn't make any difference to the exchange what address the transaction came from... they should only be concerned with outputs... so they should see the newly created UTXO just fine and you shouldn't need to contact support at all.

[jackg]

The legitimate exchanges that you send a nested segwit transaction to (from the address beginning with bc1) will be able to add your funds manually within a few days after contacting support.

That should be "native"

And it shouldn't make any difference to the exchange what address the transaction came from... they should only be concerned with outputs... so they should see the newly created UTXO just fine and you shouldn't need to contact support at all.

Aha yes I do! I'm getting confused in my old age 😂.

And it shouldnt matter but sometimes it does. If said badly coded exchange doesn't use a client and instead uses a series of api calls to block explorers (or wherever they go) then you end up with the issue of coins. The well coded exchanges that don't do this can be ignored as they accept transactions based off the hash power voting system and the recognition of the longest chain..