Electrum 4.5.3 released

[cygan]

today the next (4.5.3) version of the Electrum wallet was released. it brings various fixes such as these:

Code:

* General:
   - changed: label tx sizes as "vbytes", and feerates as "sat/vbyte" (#8864)
   - fix: wizard regression not able to use HWW as cosigner for new wallets (643fbec)
   - fix: onchain invoice paid detection broken if jsonpatch enabled (#8842)
   - fix: program not starting because of bad "proxy" config value (#8837)
   - fix: wizard: don't log sensitive values: replace blacklist with whitelist (638fdf11)

under the github link you can find more fixes that this new version contains: https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/blob/master/RELEASE-NOTES
the download files as well as the signatures, you can take from here and please only from here: https://electrum.org/#download

[1714748856]

1714748856

[1714748856]

1714748856

[1714748856]

1714748856

[1714748856]

1714748856

[1714748856]

1714748856

[Charles-Tim]

Code:

changed: label tx sizes as "vbytes", and feerates as "sat/vbyte" (#8864)

I am glad to see the byte and sat/byte changed to vbyte and sat/vbyte. It is worth including that the transaction size and fee rate are both in virtual size before, but just that it is indicated as byte and sat/byte which did confused many people thinking it is the actual size and not virtual size, but it is virtual size.

[Husires]

sat/byte caused me (and maybe many) to pay fees much lower than the actual value when the fees were high, so I will update.

Code:

new: basic "add server as bookmark" functionality

This feature may be useful for those who prefer to connect to specific servers.

[dkbit98]

today the next (4.5.3) version of the Electrum wallet was released

It looks like this is a significant update, and I see some important changes and fixes for hardware wallets, especially with multisig setup for Trezor One devices.
I would still be very careful and avoid making multisig setup with ledger and trezor wallets.

[Pmalek]

Electrum has today posted on their Twitter profile that the wallet allows users to send the change from their transactions to their lightning channels through a submarine swap. It's a good way to preserve your privacy and not connect that change in the future to other coins and addresses by mistake. You need to select send change to lightning in the drop-down menu to use this feature.
https://twitter.com/ElectrumWallet/status/1764956987912032477

[Yamane_Keto]

Electrum has today posted on their Twitter profile that the wallet allows users to send the change from their transactions to their lightning channels through a submarine swap.

This is the first time I've heard of "toxic change" but the idea that instead of returning the change to you, it can be used to fund your Lightning Network channels is a smart idea. The only problem is the inability to bump fees later, which means you are forced to overpaying fees for create submarine swap transaction or waiting until network fees being low which will result in limited usage.

[Pmalek]

This is the first time I've heard of "toxic change" but the idea that instead of returning the change to you, it can be used to fund your Lightning Network channels is a smart idea.

I have heard the term many times, but feel like it's too harsh. Any change can be considered toxic because bitcoin has a public blockchain. You would have to coinjoin or mix your coins to again gain an advantage in the privacy race before you use the change from one transaction for a different one to a different party or use case. Adding the coins to a lightning channel is another solution to mask the history of your coins.

[Yamane_Keto]

You would have to coinjoin or mix your coins to again gain an advantage in the privacy race before you use the change from one transaction for a different one to a different party or use case. Adding the coins to a lightning channel is another solution to mask the history of your coins.

The privacy generated by using Submarine Swaps is a smart idea, but their primary purpose was to allow Lightning channels to be refilled via (on-chain) (off-chain) transactions, but since the transaction is a Hash Time Locked Contract (HTLC), the option of pumping fees using RBF And CPFP leads to replacing the secret with a new transaction, which makes it bad to use in the case of high Bitcoin fees, as you can wait for weeks before confirming the transaction, or you will always pay higher fees.