Bitaddress not sweeping correctly

[realsteelboy]

does there an issue to use bitaddress with segwit? I am planning to use bitadress to make educational youtube videos for newbies. I am interested to read more opinions .

As I know bitaddress.org only generated legacy address, it should additional code colon + private key (from bitaddress.org) to generate segwit into electrum.
p2wpkh-p2sh: 3 (nested segwit)
p2wpkh: bc1 (native segwit)

Also, Trezor use nested as default.

Not quite sure of what you mean there. Should I have done that before sweeping the private key into electrum?

I realised the issue might be with electrum rather than Trezor too.

What I could really do with is someone that knows their Electrum/Trezor setup inside out and would be happy with going through some of this privately with me over the phone in real time.

If anyone knows of anyone that understands them both and is willing to work for a bit of coin please send a message

[Csmiami]

Ok, had a little test with the Electrum/Trezor set up.

Set up electrum on a comp, swept the private key of a small paper wallet. No issues there, all as expected.

Waited for confirmations then tried to send the coin to a blockchain account.

Just curious about this one, but why on earth would you want to do that? Going from a Trezor+Electrum setup to a Blockchain.com wallet is for sure a downgrade; on privacy, coin control and security

Not quite sure of what you mean there. Should I have done that before sweeping the private key into electrum?

If the wallet you want to sweep is either nested or native Segwit, yes. Otherwise, the private key will be read as a Legacy one.

Did a google search and found nothing. Could it be because the trezor hasn't been updated?

You can connect you device to the trezor web wallet and check the firmware version you are using there. A new firmware was released a couple of days ago to make the way Trezor handles Segwit transactions safer, and I recall them saying that

We are providing a patch for Electrum as a pull request #6198. It will be impossible to use Electrum with Trezor 1.9.1 and 2.3.1 until this patch is released.

This however, should not affect older firmware versions (or so I believe).
I'm curious about something here too....

Set up electrum on a comp, swept the private key of a small paper wallet. No issues there, all as expected.

Waited for confirmations then tried to send the coin to a blockchain account. Asked to enter code and then got this message.

DataError: Native segwit is disabled

So you did go to Electrum, then swept the address by importing the private key, receiving address is supposed to be one inside the wallet if you don't change it, then clicked sweep and created a transaction? Because it's a bit unclear whether you get the error when you sweep from the paper wallet into Trezor(Electrum), or when you send from Electrum to blockchain.

Also, did you get a transaction ID before getting the error? And, where did you get the error? On Blockchain, or on Electrum?

[NeuroticFish]

I had no time to answer, I'll add only that that tx id would be useful to see if
* it is confirmed
* what kind of address you have in trezor (1*, 3*, bc1*)

I do have experience with Electrum, but no Trezor (I have only Ledger).


I also agree with @Csmiami: unless you do it for testing purposes, there's no good reason to transfer funds from Trezor to blockchain.com wallet.

[realsteelboy]

Little update, I got the trezor to work and send coins on for the test. I think my firmware was really old and when I updated to 1.6 or something it let me do it. All good there.

I found the issue with the sweeping of the private key, after a bit of investigation it looks like the second half of the key I had written down is actually the second half of the public key. Stupid mistake, luckily not for an amount that is gonna be too soul crushing.  

I think I already know the answer but if I have half a private key and a full public key the chances of brute forcing are still a gazillion to 1 yeah? I'll just hold on to them and you never know in 50 years time with quantum computing it might be the ultimate forced hodl.

Thanks for the help and advice, I'm off to console myself with booze