Topic: BTC funds 'stuck' in wallet - can not send (Read 431 times)

0sat/vB or anything below 1000sat/kvB is non-standard.
Ref: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/84cd6478c422bc296589ab031f5c76e7bab2704d/src/policy/policy.h#L24-L25 and /policy.h#L56-L57
That's why most nodes will reject it if you try to broadcast such transaction, but "non-standard" doesn't mean that it's invalid so those same nodes will still accept it once it's in the blockchain.

And also, I just mentioned that it's the "uncommon thing" in the input, not necessarily means that it's the cause of the issue.

That can't be. The moment a transaction is confirmed, all outputs are stored in chainstate, not mempool.

Since all these transactions are coming from F2Pool, it may have something to do with the fact that some of these skip the mempool entirely and instead go straight into a block. Maybe the Electrum servers are not designed to handle this edge case, collect only transactions which it finds in a mempool from Bitcoin Core and as a result silently discard the whole tree of transactions.

That's the weird part indeed.

What part of dab3aa35938be5d543e323480ef24d5c03f9766e947f0f654f043239319f10c2 is non-standard? It doesn't pay a mining fee, but miners do that all the time. Is there anything else I'm overlooking? If so, maybe it can be reproduced on testnet to report the bug.

Still a weird case since the transaction spent a single UTXO from the non-standard transaction mined by the Pool where he's mining.
So isolating the private key doesn't make sense because there only one UTXO to be spent, still, it's what seem to have worked.

Some evidence; refer to the balance in the screenshot he provided in 1st page.
Then by reproducing a watch-only copy of his wallet using "common input heuristics" method from the readily available info in this thread:
His two latest transactions tallied to the displayed balance of 0.06487049 BTC:

• -0.04442469 BTC = 6c36ae221bd5a619aa61d60da073b532db31a9c3fd3bab5ef47c712b39beab64 (sent before the solution)
• -0.02044580 BTC = bb931b44d6cbb0fceeebf24a9defc0a3a2ebd1de53508485f3ca6cf29a8c00bd (sent after the solution)

The transaction that he sent after you post the solution is bb931b44d6cbb0fceeebf24a9defc0a3a2ebd1de53508485f3ca6cf29a8c00bd
and by that time, the wallet shouldn't have any other inputs based from the remaining balance after: 0.06487049 - 0.04442469 = 0.02044580 (that one input in the 2nd tx)

Unfortunately without any way to reproduce the error in Electrum, it's impossible to shed a light to that issue to be able to patch an actual fix.
The only uncommon thing is he spent a "non-standard" but consensus-valid transaction mined by the pool itself.

I'm glad my suggestion solved the problem, I hope you can use Electrum more often to receive your mining income. Electrum is an excellent wallet because of the total control of UTXO, coin control and etc.

What nc50lc wrote makes sense, but isolating the child privkey for the problematic address in a new keystore (in an unexplained way) solved the problem. Perhaps other simpler suggestions would have worked as well, such as spending only from that address through Electrum's Coin Control.


As nc50lc mentioned, this issue should be forwarded to the developers, but since before the transaction was signed there was a button to report the bug to the developers, the only way to report this to the developers is to report it to them manually via Github or ask ThomasV (who has an account on this forum) to read the thread, but from time to time he comes here.

Well it's quite reasonable that particular approach worked it was a smart idea of course thumbs up to Forsyth Jones. In my opinion I think the reason it worked was because with the child private key of that particular address that had the issue was isolated by accessing it via its own child keys instead of the master key or seed phrase as usual.
My point is probably Electrum could not spend the coins for some reason and since other coins were available in the other child addresses, instead of displaying an error code the first time it would likely skip that particular address and attempt spending the others but accessing the funds via that child key won't give Electrum a Chance to skip it since there is only one spendable input.

I followed the instructions posted by Forsyth Jones, step by step.

The first instruction was to change Electrum server. I did this, however this did not fix the problem.

It was the following steps (try importing only the private key from the address...) that fixed the problem.

I did not need to do the Bitcoin Core steps.

I've had weird issues with this wallet address for a while, for example only seeing transactions made up to summer 2022 in regular wallet apps (such as Coinbase Wallet, Trust Wallet and a 3rd wallet app I tried which I've forgotten the name of). I never had a problem sending or receiving though, so it didn't bother me. I used Electrum for the first time a couple days ago (as advised here) and that is the first time I've seen ALL transactions listed (including transactions made since summer 2022) however it took a long while to synchronise (a few hours maybe). I'm guessing that apps didn't show new transactions as there were too many total transactions and the apps were timing out synchronising?

Is importing the private key the part that worked? If so, it's still weird: the seed phrase reproduced the address, so it should also include the private key. It's still a weird case.

I guess it should be importing the private key instead of the wallet might have resolved that because the other suggestion of downloading the qt and running own node has nothing to do with signing the TX from the wallet.

Could be a new bug that should be resolved.

Which one: Switching to another server, importing the private key to Electrum or Bitcoin Core?
It's important to note which solved the issue.

Just a little explanation to what's going on:
Electrum doesn't support signing of serialized unsigned raw transaction hex, it should be a PSBT binary file or base64/base43 string for the "Sign" button to be enabled.
Since it's hex, it assumed that the transaction is already fully signed and ready to send to the network; thus, "Broadcast" button is enabled instead.

For the test unsigned transaction's weirdly large size, it's because Electrum created PSBT instead of unsigned raw transaction hex.
With PSBT, that large UTXO should be included to the meta data within the PSBT but that would be discarded once the transaction is fully signed and converted to serialized RAW transaction.

Now the mystery is the error which should've been reported for the developers to debug.
Or at least have the contents shared here since something "worked" without clear explanation about how.

Very happy to report that this worked! Thank you so much for taking the time to reply with such clear and comprehensive instructions! I will now redact my wallet address from earlier posts as the problem is solved.

Anything interesting in the report content which you can see when you click on "Show report contents"?

Be careful as the report content can contain data which you don't want to be public, so go thoroughly through it and sanitize accordingly before you intend to post something of it here.

I looked at the transaction from F2pool and besides it has A LOT of outputs (2034!), I couldn't spot anything strange with your UTXO that causes LoyceV's Electrum to hiccup and burp such a large transaction. That's really odd. And OP's Electrum isn't happy either...

I tested with my Electrum and frankly nothing looks suspicious and transaction size is small as expected (my hidden destination address is also a native segwit type):


Only when I export the PSBT it is 67.5kB (smaller than LoyceV had). Is the large size due to fact that the UTXO is an output of a transaction with 2034 outputs? Anyway, Electrum shouldn't stumble over this.


P.S.
Spending the problematic UTXO is about to be confirmed (in mempool since about 2024-09-17 22:44 UTC)...

Have you tried changing the electrum server?

Try importing only the private key from the address bc1qkjhyr44s4ksuhavgkf5hrs2xesfg2h6z63jp7r into electrum and try sending it to the desired address. To get the private key for a specific address, click on the address tab, then right-click on private key, it will ask for your wallet encryption password, just type it and it will show something like: p2wpkh:Lxxxxx... this is your privkey of this addr.



Create a new wallet file in electrum by selecting the option: Import bitcoin addresses or private keys... paste the private key p2wpkh:Lxxxxx... after loading the transactions, try to send.

If the problem persists, I recommend that you download the bitcoin core full node and wait for it to finish synchronizing (it may take days or hours depending on your internet connection).

Try downloading bitcoin core v23.0 or lower, as it has the option to create a legacy wallet, which allows you to import private keys directly.

Tip: from now on, only use electrum or bitcoin core to receive payments from your pool, as you will have less complications.

Yes.
You may want to consider using an address on your Trezor for mining payouts directly.

Sound advice, thanks again. I assume that in the meantime, if I transfer everything apart from the 'stuck' balance OUT of this wallet, and create a new wallet for mining payouts - that would be a sensible step forward?

That's the same result: Electrum should be able to sign this transaction.

In that case, don't do it.

Let's wait for someone who with a deeper understanding of what's going on here.

I don't know? I just installed Electrum, and used my 12 word recovery seed to open the wallet.


I really appreciate your help and advice, but this is all way above my understanding. My knowledge of bitcoin wallets extends to clicking a 'send' or 'receive' button and scanning a QR (or copy / pasting an address). To date I've never had a problem like this

Did you import the private key into this wallet? If so, I would expect the sign button to work. I still have no idea why Electrum can't handle this specific input normally.

You could sign with coinb.in, but it's a website so you should NOT do that online. If you copy it to an air-gapped system (running from a Linux LIVE DVD for instance) and wipe it afterwards you can safely try this. Don't enter you private key in an online browser.

Forgive me, but I don't understand this instruction. Although I've been mining for years, I've only ever done basic transactions in and out of wallets. Would you mind explaining this step in a little more detail (to ensure I get it right)?

I tried loading from text, but the 'sign' button is greyed out:

That shouldn't matter: once confirmed, a bitcoin transaction doesn't depend on whoever sent it.

I tried to create an unsigned transaction with that input, but the transaction I get is 89972 bytes in size. I'm lost here, I thought I understood things, but this is a new one.

---

---

But if I create a transaction using coinb.in, I get a normal transaction size:
You can click Tools > Load transaction > From text to load it into Electrum, verify the Output address (32MAHEMHwmhMZjDiXB9NBWhb13nsCEpp56) and amount, and sign it if you want. But VERIFY it thoroughly.

I don't get why Electrum created such a large transaction.

Yes - once again I am greeted with a generic error message (see image below):

Would it be worth contacting F2Pool support, since the payment was sent by them?

Have you tried sending from Electrum?

OK... so I have managed to open the wallet up in Electrum, and I have identified the problematic transaction (highlighted in the image below). 0.0204458 was the F2Pool payout for that day, and 0.0204458 is the exact amount that is 'stuck' in the wallet. Does the drill-down information explain anything helpful?

Why don't you try Electrum instead of Coinbase and "Trust" wallet? I've imported the address (watch-only), and see 6 inputs. I see no reason why you wouldn't be able to send this.

---

---

General note: importing your private key into different wallets is not the best idea. You should probably retire this address and use a new one from now on.

I have inclusive electricity at a couple of my sites, not 'free' as such. But that post is probably 4 or 5 years ago (I don't remember it). I've invested a lot more since then and mine over multiple locations with varying setups / power arrangements. That being said, you are right and sadly I do not mine 3-8k a day! I meant to say 0.005 - 0.015 BTC, with the smallest payment received (since when the issue started) being 0.005, which is the minimum payment threshold of F2Pool (and therefore all payments received are > 0.005). Not massive, but certainly not dust.

Wallet address: *** REDACTED - ISSUE NOW SOLVED ***

Interestingly, Block explorer reports the following:

This address has transacted 93 times on the Bitcoin blockchain.
It has received a total of 0.74037006 BTC $43,936.20 and has sent a total of 0.67861268 BTC $40,271.30
The current value of this address is 0.06175738 BTC $3,664.90

I'm not sure if this is relevant, but aside from the balance, this information is way off. This wallet has seen over 2000 transactions, and has received double digits BTC total (close to 20 probably), however it only shows a handful of transactions dating back to June 2024. I have been mining nearly 5 years and received payouts daily since start, plus I send lots of small payments, therefore there should be 2000+ transactions.

According to block explorer, the last time the wallet was empty was 23/08/2024 - therefore the problem was introduced on or after 24/08/2024

Your post history shows you have "free electricity" and were looking to spend 100k on mining hardware. That doesn't add up to earning 3-8k per day from that mining.

Can you share the address?
Bitcoin is usually quite simple: if you have the private key to an address, you can spend it.

It's odd that they all give the "same" results - a generic failure message.

Found this about trust wallet:


It is possible that someone sent a dust amount to your wallet, and you are inadvertently trying to spend it. If that applies to you, then try sending an amount less than the full amount in the wallet.

So, to add further info and answer some of the questions here:

No, there have not been any small 'dust' amounts sent to the wallet. Payments from F2Pool are daily, and typically in the region of 0.05 - 0.15 BTC.

The wallet is normally emptied every few days (by sending to my Trezor for long-term HODL). I just use this online wallet to receive mining payouts, and for processing of petty cash withdrawals (e.g. a few hundred USD here and there).

Looking on Block Explorer, I can see that the last time I was able to successfully empty the wallet was 23/08/2024. The smallest payment I have received since then is ~0.05 BTC. There is no apparent indication of stuck transactions in Block Explorer (however I'm not sure what I'm looking for here)?

As per my original post, I have used the recovery seed to open the wallet in various apps which all give the same result. I haven't tried Electrum however, and will try that now and report back.

Have you tried to check the wallet address on explorer if there's a stuck transaction in your wallet address?
If the wallet address that you receive BTC from the mining pool is confirmed then the Coinbase wallet and trust wallet have an issue processing the transaction or maybe it's a bug in your wallet that Coinbase and trust wallet can't able to read.

Coinbase has an option on the settings where you can able to backup the private key why not backup the private key and then move and import it to a better wallet like Electrum wallet and then make a transaction?
 

Well if I understand your points and questions correctly op I'll say you are probably referring to what most wallets will tag as spendable balance. Some wallets especially those that are not open source usually have this kind of occurrence. Now just like NeuroticFish mentioned, all the coins in your wallet if attempted to be spent needs a fee not the fact and the spendable balance is more like your total balance minus the fees required to spend it.

I experienced something like this when I was making use of mycelium and from what I observed at that time, the spendable fees is dynamic meaning it changes as bitcoin price does and also as average fees on the MEMPOOL adjusts. Some other altcoins in mostly custodial wallets remove the fees from the total amount sent but for bitcoin you fees has its own output just like the sent amount does too.

Have you ever exchanged bitcoin for ordinals? I haven't used Coinbase since 2015, but from what I gei, it provides you with the recovery phrase. Have you tried restoring this wallet through Electrum?

In Electrum, you have access to the addresses tab with all the balances and a tab called "coins" where all your inputs are shown in detail.

The problem doesn't appear to be a lack of fee, since you tried to send a significantly higher balance.

These are the parts I've found relevant.
Is it by chance that a significant part of your funds consist in small inputs? Maybe even dust? Like getting from pool or from other sources (ordinals?) amounts like 0.00000546 BTC or even less? Or maybe not much bigger either?

The point is that sending your coins costs some, and that cost depends on how many inputs they are. If the inputs are too small it costs more than their value to be sent out. Or I'd expect too small inputs cannot be even sent by some wallets.

I don't know what is exactly your problem, but I think that this may be the directions:
* either the fee is getting significantly big
* either some inputs cannot be sent for some reason

If I am correct then the fix I know is to get a wallet that can handle coin control (Electrum for desktop, Sparrow, maybe others too) and send out only the bigger inputs.

Of course, you can also post your address and let people take a proper look instead of guessing, but maybe you don't want that for privacy reasons.

I have an issue whereby approx 0.02 BTC is stuck in a wallet, which I can't send out from the wallet. I have no idea why or how to fix this. I typically use Coinbase wallet (using an app on my phone). If I try to send from this app, it will say I have 'X' balance (for argument sake lets say this is 0.05 BTC), however if I try to send the whole wallet balance, I am greeted with a generic failure message (e.g. transaction failed, try again later). If I lower the amount (e.g. to 0.1 BTC, or any amount that does not include the 'stuck' BTC balance) it sends just fine.

I have tried using the recovery seed to recover the wallet into different apps and get the same problem. I notice however that with one other app I tried (Trust wallet), it shows the balance by indicates that 0.2 BTC as 'inscribed'. I have no idea what this means and there seems to be no helpful information about this online. It says I can 'free up' the inscribed BTC by going into settings and preferences, however when I open this menu there is nothing about 'inscribed' BTC.

What has happened here? How do I fix this?

If relevant, and for context I am a Bitcoin miner and the BTC has been paid from F2pool for mining rewards.