Topic: Electrum to Electrum - transaction "lost" (Read 582 times)

I would tend to agree... unfortunately, none of us except the OP were there... and know exactly what has transpired. To a certain extent we have to take the OP's word for what they did and what information they have... and that the information they are providing is true and correct.

However, a set of 12 seed words doesn't magically start producing different wallet addresses.

So, it's either the correct seed and some other variable like the seed extenstion phrase or derivation path has changed, or "BIP39 seed" option was selected, or it's some weird bug... or the seed is just wrong.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I wish the OP the best of luck, but there really isn't anything "new" to suggest at this point...

I can't agree more.
But I bet he'll insist that it's the right seed phrase. He said it multiple times in his two threads already.

And he also said that it might be the old version corruption bug (perhaps, done in the session when he sent the 2 transactions).
I've already gave up on the finding a solution in my last reply to OP because his situation looks hopeless, aside from his claims and the results are contradicting.
Recovering deleted files from an encrypted drive/OS is troublesome enough, moreover, the flash drive is unavailable:

I read the GitHub comment about file corruption caused by deleting the wallet file from outside the app. I don't see how it fits this story. TAILS is amnesiac, all files are deleted on shutdown, so that bug could only affect a wallet created within a TAILS session. The workflow - create wallet, write seed phrase, copy & paste address to Windows Electrum, send transaction - would have to be fairly contorted to write the empty wallet's seed phrase and copy&paste the other wallet's address. Maybe I'm overthinking, and the out-of-app file deletion is exactly the contortion which would cause this

There is also his claim that he successfully restored the wallet with seed words in TAILS before installing the Appimage. I'm inclined to believe this. If it's true, then the file corruption problem is irrelevant, whether it occurred or not

I suggest the seed phrase he's using now is from a fresh wallet created with the 3.3.8 Appimage, an empty wallet. The seed words for accessing the coin in the older version Electrum wallet are somewhere else, or lost. This contradicts his claim that he has the right seed words. In the absence of proof and 19 months passage of time, it's more likely than any other guess, in my opinion

Great, everything seems to be accurate.

But the issue is: his current seed phrase (he's positive that it's the correct one) can't restore his previous wallet.
He mentioned that he had upgraded his "E_Tails" using the appimage; and he believe that it's the corruption bug based from the issue's replies (in GitHub).
With those info, it could be the corruption bug.

Some notes from memory ...

Around the time of this transaction, Electrum users were being phished using the (previously) built-in server-to-client messaging function. The initial response to this was to remove the messaging function. Some users didn't upgrade, continued to suffer from the phishing problem, so there was a decision to configure Electrum servers to refuse to connect to clients older than 3.3.4, to force users to upgrade

TAILS does not update very frequently, so there was a period where the Electrum built-in to TAILS was unable to connect to servers. Also, the Python source of the post 3.3.4 versions required a later Python version than available in TAILS. A "binary" Electrum package (Appimage) was built and made available, and then (at least in Reddit) it was repeatedly promoted as "How to run Electrum 3.3.8 in TAILS", with instructions

Eventually, a later TAILS update had the necessary versions of Python and Electrum

Correct, the first part of the modification should be all that is required... this is the bit that basically bypasses/ignores the checksum (similar to what Electrum does)... You just force it to return true, rather than calculate the checksum and see if it matches etc.

You don't want the second part, the change from "mnemonic"+passphrase --> "electrum"+passphrase as that will break the BIP39 generation...

I've just tested this, and it seems to work.

Electrum seed:

OG Ian Coleman tool, checksum fails:



Modified Ian Coleman tool set to ignore checksum:



Generated addresses:



Addresses in Electrum using BIP39 option and "Legacy" + m/44'/0'/0' path:



FYI, the line of code that needs to be modified was on Line# 28526 on the current version of the Ian Coleman tool:




No. Because that 2nd tool includes the "electrum"+passphrase modification... so any seed that it generates will NOT be BIP39 compliant. The thing you need to realise is that even if you don't explicitly use a BIP39 passphrase (or the "seed extenstion phrase" in Electrum)... there is a default one that is used... in BIP39 it is the word "mnemonic"... in electrum it is the word "electrum". So, even if you leave it blank, the 2 systems will never generate the same seed from the same 12/24 words.


Not quite sure how that factors into things? Your wallet was an old Legacy wallet... it'll most likely be in the m/44'/0'/0' derivation path... they extra "script_type" value is only a factor when creating newer SegWit based wallets.

Well, I could try at least.

Here is a modification on iancoleman that you kind of suggested in the other topic    &   @BlackHatCoiner   posted it https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.57185821    -   how different that modification would be to the already modified tool you've posted here on my topic?
  
Then you did this post in the same topic: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.57213565  
      -the 1st  tool is the one you have also posted here
      - the 2nd tool though is different.   Could you I use it for BIP39 Elcetrum seed because you wrote that it bypasses the checksum

or this post from you seems quite appealing too: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49651803

Honestly... not likely to be a derivation path issue then.


Ahhhh that would require something slightly different I believe... as it seems you're trying to get the "BIP39 version" of an Electrum seed.

Generally speaking... an Electrum generated seed will not be a valid BIP39 seed (there are some relatively rare exceptions). So, if you click the "BIP39 seed" and type in an Electrum seed, it will likely show "checksum: failed". Electrum will allow you to go ahead and use it anyway if you really want...

But, to the best of my knowledge, there is no way to replicate this behaviour with the Ian Coleman tool (or the tool I posted). However, it should theoretically be possible by simply modifying the Ian Coleman tool to ignore the checksum calculation.

I'll have a look into it over the weekend and see what I can come up with (if someone else doesn't beat me to it)

1. I created the wallet & kept it runing (didn't close Electrum Software)
2. straight away sent a test transaction
3. couldn't connect to the servers, did some fix & so the circle in the bottom right went to synchronizing, now I could see the test transaction as 'not veriefied'
4. then sent the bigger transaction
5. onlty then I started looking for a solution
______________means I deleted & restored the wallet after the use only_____________

@HCP
Could you tell me how to use the modified tool you posted me earlier on.

Everytime I type in an Electrum seed & keep all the modifications in the tool as it is  (standard derivation path: m/0) the wallet & addresses to it are there.
    - Now let's just say I use the same seed, that was generated by Electrum, to restore a wallet in Electrum software and instead of just going ahead I check the BIP39 & choose derivation path m'44/0'/0'    
    - Q: how can I find this derivation in the tool?     beacause I have tried many different options & I can not find it.

Why am I asking: because on the picture with the two wallets @bitmover hosted, the wallet on the right side is restored with BIP39 & derivation path m/44'/0'/0'  -  I need to find it in the tool.      

Note: I did not restore that wallet in Spt.2019 using derivation path, only after people started suggesting.  (which was after I lost the wallet with the funds)

I have this thought when I could find this derivation path wallet in the tool, it might help ahead in finding the lost wallet.

Yeah... it's looking more and more likely that there are either multiple wallet files or multiple seeds... You can't actually select the derivation path when you create a wallet, only when you are restoring it. So, you would not have been able to get a weird derivation path unless you used the seed to restore the wallet before you even attempted to use it.

And you only get to specify the derivation path if you use a BIP39 seed anyway... with an Electrum seed, it is automatically detected.

My guesses are:
- Multiple Seeds
- Multiple wallet files
- File corruption bug

The first one, you'd have to go through all your notes etc and make sure you are 100% using the correct seed and don't have any other seeds recorded anywhere.

The second and third... well, you'd likely need to have access to the drive media and be able to do a file recovery to see if you could recover the original wallet files... which you don't

If it's what happened, you can only recover it from the deleted wallet files
because the address' private key might only be recoverable by restoring one of those wallet's seed phrase.

Since your current seed phrase restores an entirely different wallet, restored a couple of times with different configurations, both didn't help;
and if it's really the bug, then there's a high chance that the addresses in your screenshot are actually addresses from a deleted/another wallet file brought by the bug.

Lastly, Electrum developers and public server owners don't have access to users' keys and funds, they wont be able to help even if they want to.

What is described in the link is absolutely possible that this is actually what I did.
If so,  is there anything at all that might help, or at least I could try besides file restoration

I could get the addresses but only from  the left wallet >>>>look at the picture from @bitmover
     The left wallet is the seed without BIP39 check
     The right one is with BIP39 check box - from that one I wasn't able to find the address until now.

Keep in Mind both were generated using the same seed & I can recover the right wallet anytime using this derivation path: m/44'/0'/0'

You say above you are now using the modified iancoleman tool to try to find the former adresses/keys. But with the tool have you already been able to get the same adresses and keys you currently have on your Electrum wallet with your seed?

Since it was on that Synchronizing symbol,  I started researching the reason and found out on the Electrum website that my version is outdated & I have to download the appimage & update it manually     &   so I did        &      et voila  it went online straight after.

I did not check the signeture. I could send and receive funds without any problems after the update!   - which means Phishing & malware is out of question!  

@Saint-loup
Once you go into the wallet, on the right bottom side you see the Network status in form of a circle.
Green = online
Blue = online routed via proxy
Red = offline
Synchronizing symbol = sync

So, initially I had it on red, which means it was offline.  Then I did something, tried to fix it and so following it went to Synchronizing symbol and all of sudden I could see the      incoming test transaction.   Since then it was there as 'Not Verified'  
   Thus for me it was clear it went through and eventually will be verified, & so I sent the bigger transaction to that wallet.

@NotATether
Yeah, absolutely.     Just how.......?    
With the modified tool of    iancolman.io  that @HCP   had posted,  I've been trying & until now no result.    Seems I'm trying wrong.   Any tip on that?

Tails version:         3.16.
Electrum version:  I sent an e-mail to Tails support team, hopefully they will reply because they know the answer.  
                              If not, then when I'm right it was 3.3.4   -  might be also prior to this one          

I have used this instructions to download the appimage so that I update the Electrum software manually:
https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tails.html    because the wallet had issues getting online

      But 3.3.4 that problem was fixed  -  so seems like I have used the wallet prior to 3.3.4  -   but as I said, I am not certain.

Edit:
      But based on the screenshots I took of the addresses  - you can see that it is 3.3.4   &   later because the arrow at the drop down menu was added with  v3.3.4   -    means  it was  v3.3.4   or  later

This is not what I understood from your OP and your posts above. You said you were not able to reach any Electrum server, so how could you be able to watch your incoming transactions into your wallet?  



How did you learn your Electrum software was outdated? Did you receive a message/popup on your screen saying that and inviting you to click on a link?

Did you check the signature of the files you've downloaded as suggested by Pooya87 above? If they haven't been modified you can still check their signature.

I was thinking that this might had happened to you: issues/5082#issuecomment-461428986
BTW, the first post is the "old version corruption bug" that you've been mentioning in the other thread.

No, the bug will produce a wallet based from two different wallet files (with different seeds).
So my suggestion was to get all recoverable wallet files so you can try to restore their seed phrase to the latest version.
Changing the derivation path will only derive a different master key but it's still based from the same seed; not what's described in the issue.

With the current data and the flash drive gone, I have no other suggestions.

@nc50lc

Case of corruption bug?  I consider it too.   Is either that or the wrong derivation path,  anything else is out questions.


Unfortunately, I won't be able of doing it!    Tails was on an USB stick & that stick was gone since mid-end Oct. 2019. Besides that I deleted the wallet files (prior of starting topic in Spt. 2019) as it was advised in guide lines on Tails website.


That might be exactly what it is.   
       -Now, restoring from files is out of question.
       - Can I achieve it trying different derivation paths?  - restoring the right private key


Would you clerify it?    I don't think is somehow related with my problem but I would like to understand it still.


As mentioned above.........
No 

Did you also verify the digital signature of the binaries that you downloaded against this public key[1] before installing it? Keep in mind that it is not enough to have downloaded it from "correct" website, you must verify the signature against the correct public key. Without it you can NOT trust the authenticity of what you have.

[1] https://raw.githubusercontent.com/spesmilo/electrum/master/pubkeys/ThomasV.asc

@HCP

Look, I don't quite remember now. I have this believe.....
Yes, might be, I did try to create & restore few wallets (for the purpose of finding solution) but if, then only after I sent the test transaction to the lost wallet


Here is another thing as mantioned already few times:

• I sent first a test transaction to my "lost" wallet        and      remember seeing that incoming transaction onto my lost wallet - that is certain!                Because.....
  
  I remember seeing this transaction as   'Not Veriefied'   all the time (until I lost the wallet)      
  So, I did the transaction and I saw it showing off in my wallet, even though as   'Not Verified', thus I understood it went through and eventually it will confirm.      
  
  That was the reason  I sent  the funds to the 2nd address in the wallet  because for me it was clear it went through & eventually will be confirmed.
  
  • Following, many hours have past  and nothing was confirmed, still as 'Not Veriefied",  even though I put the mining fee for confirmation within 5 blocks  (for big transaction within 2)
    
    That is how I started looking for the solution:          deleted the wallet files, recovered again, deleted again, restored again  & so on.
    
    
    
    
    Quote from: HCP on June 23, 2021, 10:29:23 PM
    Or am I misunderstanding and you're saying you restored the wallet once (prior to updating etc) and it showed the "lost" address, but not the transaction data?
    
    I idid restore the wallet twice.  Did see the same addresses  but didn't see the transactions as confirmed
    
    That is why I had to delete the wallet anew (based on guide line on Tails website)  & search for futher solution, where I came across the suggestion on Electrum website - to update the Electrum software manually -  & so I did.
    
    Since then I have never been able to restore the "lost" wallet with the funds.

I'd say you should focus on getting the right derivation path first, then wallet file recovery as a last resort.

What was the electrum version bundled with Tails before you updated to version 3.3.8? Since you mentioned that the seed restores the wallet fine on the old version, but it restores to a different wallet on this newer version, it is possible that Electrum has changed the default derivation path or otherwise the algorithm it uses to derive the private keys, hence why knowing the old electrum version (or at least the Tails version you used and we use package manager repositories to pinpoint the Electrum version ourselves) is so important, as it will allow us to scan for code changes on Github related to key derivation.

Edit:

Do you at least know which version of Tails you used at the time?

Regardless of the answer, by looking at this: electrum/issues/5082 (the corruption bug) and the replies, there's a chance that it could be the case.
If it's really what happened and you've sent the bitcoins to the corrupted wallet file, then the partial solution to this is to restore that wallet file using a file recovery software.
And that would be a problem depending on where you've installed Tails and if it's been active since the incident.

But the real problem is if that recovered wallet can spend from that address, because based from the "issue", the corruption will produce different addresses that aren't covered by your master public key.
Means that your seed can't derive the right private key(s) to spend from them.

- You can try to recover all available possible wallet files in "wallets" folder and get all of the wallets' seed phrase, then use your 'E_Wind' to restore each of them.

---

One scenario that the corruption bug might happen is when you created the wallet while the "default_wallet" is still active.
Newbies usually create a wallet during Electrum's first "Install Wizard" which is actually wallet creation window, prior to creating his official wallet.

Since the issue's going nowhere from all the "no", recovering every deleted/overwritten Electrum wallet files from Tails' persistent folder it's worth the try.

Note: in case of non-recoverable funds, Electrum developers aren't liable for the missing funds (damages), it's in the software's licence.

I don't think it would be the "file corruption bug"... as that would have required that you had (at least attempted to create) multiple wallets/seeds... and you seem very adamant that you did not have multiple seeds/wallets etc.

So, either you did have multiple wallets setup... in which case that makes things like using the wrong wallet possible, in addition to the "file corruption bug"... or you didn't have multiple wallets setup... in which case the file corruption bug is not possible.


The curious thing is that you're sure you had previously used the seed to restore the wallet (at least once)... and that you could see the transaction etc... but the wallet was always "offline"?

That isn't possible... if you had restored the wallet, it would have had to have been online at some point to be able to see the transaction... All wallets are created empty, and need to be online to retrieve the transaction data.

Or am I misunderstanding and you're saying you restored the wallet once (prior to updating etc) and it showed the "lost" address, but not the transaction data?

@HCP

- it is Legacy. I have alwaysed used & recovered in Legacy
- Absolutely certain:   I did not modify derivation path
- Absolutely certain:   I did not extend the seed with custom words




1. Absolutely NOT.    I have used that wallet generated with that seed. -  Besides that I have mentioned that I did recover the "lost" wallet before I did the update on Electrum software.
2. NO.
3. NO.
4. NO.
5. Well....  in my previous topic in Spt. 2019 I wrote that the wallet was affected by a    'file corruption bug'.
Why did I write it? Because I found this information either on Tails,- or Electrum website, thus at that point it seemed to me that was it, due to descriptions on the website.       That might well be the whole problem.




Now this..... this is something Great!   &     I've been jerking on it for over half of the day
                                                                                                                                               ..... didn't go nowhere, until now at least
Here is the thing:  
>>>> look at the picture @bitmover hosted, with 2 wallets
The wallet from the left side  -  find straight away, without any problems or changing anything in the tool.
The wallet from the right side  -  I am incapable of digging it out.  Tried each Master Node, many different accounts, wallet chains & addresses   -   I can not find it.    

Any tip on that?

Keep in Mind the both wallets were generated using the same seed.




I guess too.

I have somehow this feeling that it has something to do with my problem  &  might be also  file corruption bug (mentioned in topic in Spt. 2019)
[/quote]

Might have happened, don't recall now.  I don't have that feeling though.

But let's just assume I did it.   I am absolutely certain - if I did it - I did not change any derivation path.  
Thereupon once you check the BIP39 box, it comes always automatically the following derivation path:     m/44/0'/0'
And yes, I do have some used addresses on this derivation path. You can see it on the picture above.
Wallet with the 6 transactions, on the right side, is with that derivation path.

No if all you are saying is right, it can't have anything to do with the issue unfortunately. UTF-8/Unicode compatibility disorders are pretty frequent between different operating systems and/or computers, but it's a very rare mistake/error on a same OS on a same machine.

Hello

Absolutely, mentioned few times now.
Yes, I did recover my "lost" wallet on Tails twice, before upgrading the Electrum software.


No, I have created that wallet on Tails.       

I did create also one on Windows but never had any problems with.     Problems only with Tails Electrum wallet

Everything is cool!

I value your help!
Thank you for your contribution!



......yes,    but no.    There is still missing something......     Can be improved


 @everybody      We are on the good way, just keep on thinking & suggesting.

Thank you

@pooya87

No, not even a tiny chance!     Absolutely out of question!    Because I did restore that "lost" wallet before the update with the same seed!

That is exactly what it is! - at least I think so too.
Now, how to find that wallet - that is what I'm trying to find out from the community here!


.....the longest & most diversified I've ever experienced 


No, not at all.  This are different addresses, entirely

Hello AndrRoos
Thank you for your PM.

Could you clarify something please?
Do you remember if you have been able to recover your wallet on Tails at least one time before upgrading the Electrum software?

Because as I understand, you've created your wallet and its seed on MS Windows first.
But Electrum is using UTF-8 character encoding, so maybe the (UTF-8) character set that has been used to create your seed on MS Windows is not the same as the one used on Tails?

https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/seedphrase.html

Alright fair enough. I wasn't very happy after spending quite some time reading through both threads to figure out what's going on and got chided like that. I was just trying to clarify on the scenario that you've presented. Your second response explained everything that I needed to know, didn't respond afterwards seeing the reply and edited my post instead to avoid padding the thread up unnecessarily. Nonetheless, apologies if I was harsh on my words.

HCP's response basically encompasses the gist of the entire thread.

@ranochigo

You are absolutely right!

There is no point of being frustrated or being pissed off and I am cool. Often time I am polictical incorrect & say as it is. That is World difference between being pissed off & political incorrectness.  Is just that I am aware, that some poeple write the first thing that pops in the head without digging in deeper.


I appreciate every single help & contribution from every one! 
I am willing to answer every single qustion!


Thank you

Firstly, your assumption is wrong. Whether you generate the seed online or offline makes exactly zero difference to how the seed is generated... and unless the version of Electrum that you used in Tails was very very very old (ie. pre version 2), then chances are that the version you used will have made no difference either.

Assuming the same seed words are used, then the differences between wallets are caused by the selections that are made when generating the wallet... that is to say:
- Selecting "Legacy" or "Segwit"
- Modifying the deriviation path
- "extending the seed with custom words"

Electrum has a "Seed version" system, which should prevent issues with #1... as it will automatically detect if the seed is "Legacy" or "Seed". It will also default to a specific derivation path based on that "seed version". However, this does not stop you from manually changing the derivation path (whether it is done on purpose or by accident)... Note that it's not exactly "difficult" to accidentally change the derivation path.

Also, if the seed is extended with custom words, there is zero indication that this is the case... you cannot tell if a wallet was created from an extended seed. It's much more difficult to do this "accidentally" as you have to click through the "options" button, tick the "Extend seed" checkbox and then put in the custom words in a later dialog box.


Now... I would say that one of the following are the likely causes for this whole scenario (in order of probability):

1. Accidentally using a secondary/different wallet that wasn't created using the seed you wrote down
2. Accidental modification of derivation path during initial wallet creation
3. Seeds mixed up during wallet creation
4. "forgotten" Seed Extension
5. Some hitherto unknown bug in Electrum

Unfortunately, pretty much all of these scenarios end up in the same place... ie. it's going to be incredibly difficult to recover. Especially given that all the original files on Tails were deleted

It is now pretty much impossible to check for #1... it's effectively just speculation at this point, but I've seen it happen before. A user creates multiple wallets, saves the seed for one, and then accidentally uses a receiving address from one of the others.


If you want to experiment with #2, the derivation path theory, then I would recommend downloading and running this tool offline: https://github.com/FarCanary/ElectrumSeedTester

It's basically a modified version of IanColeman's BIP39 tool that works with Electrum seeds. It also allows you to put in "custom seed extensions" (ie. a BIP39 passphrase but for Electrum seeds).

#3 seems quite unlikely, it's sort of a variation of #1 but it's a difficult thing to do given that you have to re-enter the seed to actually create the wallet. #4 also doesn't seem likely given that it requires a number of very explicit steps on behalf of the user, which you are sure that you didn't do... and as for #5, that's almost impossible to prove/disprove unless someone finds something reproducible and the devs can investigate/identify the issue.


I guess at this point, the derivation path is your best hope, so give the modified seed tool a go... but I would caution that you don't raise your hopes too high... the chances of this being the cause of all this are probably slim to none

Best of luck.

I think there is a good chance here that you actually created a brand new wallet with its own seed phrase while you were trying to import the same old seed. It is an easy mistake to make if you forget to change the first option to not generate a new seed phrase. That would explain why after "recovering" a new wallet you get a different address without changing anything else about derivation path, etc.

Those are the expected behavior of Electrum in those scenarios.

My observations/replies, in respective order:
-

• Electrum seed doesn't have a specific cold/hot wallet variant, just a seed with "seed version" that also acts as the indicator of the derivation path to use.
  Hardware wallet's seed wont be created by nor stored in Electrum during wallet creation.
  So if it was created by Electrum, then it's what Abdussamad said (multiple times) in the previous thread: you shouldn't force the derivation path selection window by checking "BIP39 seed".
  If it's the mentioned "corruption bug", then there's nothing you can do about it because if the cause is 'corruption' then the result should be 'random'.

-

• If you ticked "BIP39 seed" and it said "BIP39 (checksum: failed)", Electrum will create a wallet based on the words you've typed regardless if it's a valid BIP39 seed or not,
  that includes the Electrum seed that isn't a valid BIP39 seed.
  So the BIP39 restored wallet doesn't have a relation on the correctly restored one (didn't checked BIP39 seed), they are different wallets despite having same seed phrase.
  That said, why's both wallets have transaction(s) in them, have you been testing the wallets created through "other methods"?
  If not, you might had more than one wallets in your old E_Tails and sent the missing transaction to one of them (already mentioned before).

-

• Lastly, Electrum doesn't really store the seed phrase of a wallet created with "BIP39 seed" checkbox enabled, even the ones created using a real BIP39 seed.

That was a very long 48hours.

So, are addresses of the restored wallets the same except for the missing one?
Refer to my last reply of in that thread:

@BlackHatCoiner

thank you for this answer!

Yeah, I am quite certain that it is not understadable enough.


Messed up with Electrum?   -  what would I mess up? 
1. I've just typed in the seed that was generated   &    recovered that "lost" wallet.  Since there was still no conncetion to the servers...
2. I've updated the Electrum manager/user on Tails to newer version     and then.....
3. Typed in the same seed again    &      guess what     -       I get entirely new wallet with entirely new addresses  -  even though using the same seed!
4. And ever since I get this wallet & never the 1st one with the funds

That's all, that's the whole story.  -  Didn't do any BIP39, any phrase extension, any derivation path,  nor any other thing!
Just typed in the seed that I had in first place.  -   That's all.


Now, I assume - it has something to do with me generating the seed                  offline & on older version           meaning it became kind of a cold wallet.   Then deleted all the files, because it was recomended so on Tails website. 
   Then on Electrum website I found that it is necessary to update the wallet manually  & so I did it & from that moment onwards it worked just fine!   The Electum manager went online (once you are in the wallet)       But......
Since I have deleted all the files from that "cold" wallet,  used the exact same seed,   as a result I'm getting a brand new wallet with brand new addresses    &   the one from before,,,, have never seen again.
    That's all.   

Now @anyone  could help me here ahead


@BlackHatCoiner but thank you for that tip with source code.   Can you downoad it on GitHub?   I'm gonna check it out.

Well, from my reading, I say that it's not understandable enough. You've confused the whole situation with the given explanations. You can't have messed it up with Electrum, it's easy to use and I believe that even a newbie understands every part of the seed generation procedure. You probably made a mistake unrelated with Electrum you haven't mentioned, because you may not know it.

You can actually import an electrum seed phrase in iancoleman as long as you want legacy addresses.

@bitmover

thank you for hosting the image, which server did you use?


About the wallet creation:    initially I did not check anything at all    No BIP39, nothing!
Didn't type in derivation path!   Didn't check BIP39 box!     Nothing!!!!!!!  
I have just created an Electrum wallet on Tails    that's all.
      
Would you read the first post carefully, thank you!

Then in Spt. 2019  people suggested trying out different derivation paths.       You by the way suggested it too!  -  you may check it in my last topic.    



Everything is kind of written in the 1st post above.  I tried to put many things & keep it simple at the same, to understand.   

@everyone would you just read carefully.  Thank you!

I hosted your image in a differnet server to be able to post here

This is very weird: Creating a new wallet using the same Seed but checking BIP39 in one and in the other without checking. This is not a common practice and you shouldn't do it. This is bad for your security.


Wallets that you create with electrum are not BIP39. You are able to import wallets that you created using BIP39 in electrum, but you can't create one using electrum.

This is important. If you generated the seed inside electrum, you shouldn't have to care about derivation paths.

Unless you recovered a non bip39 seed into electrum and checked that wallet as BIP39. Then sent funds to it. Looks like this is what you did?

@BitMaxz

yeah thank you for the tool.   Unfortunately it's nothing . It scans only the address in the wallet of that particular account
That is the whole point - I don't have the right account. I have the right seed but not the right account!


So we gotta find the right account!      -   that is the main task we shall be concentrating on!   

I have the right seed, I just need the right account!

No, Jesus Christ, freaking hell, No!   

No Phishing!!!!!!!!!  No maleware!!!!!!!!!!     

@everyone    -    please read the post carefully,  before writting,  it helps.   Thank you!

@ranochigo

look..... simple

one seed gives me different wallets,     OK, undersatndable?!

once I type in that seed without BIP 39 check      -     I get one wallet with one addresses
once I type in the same seed with BIP 39 check  &  this derivation path only  m/44'/0'/0' -  I get a different wallet with diff. addresses
Here you see on the picture:
on the left with BIP39                                                                         on the right without BIP39
https://anonfiles.com/z3Fe912cu8/same_seed_different_wallet_jpg


Same seed but different wallets,   OK?!

And any other derivation paths I tried are empty.

To make it clear:  I did not restore the wallet with derivation paths in first place in Spt. 2019    -    but since the Electrum manager was outdated it created a hardware wallet in a different derivation path - at least this is what I assume.   
After I updated the Electrum manager and typed in the same freaking seed, it generated an "online" wallet -  a different wallet,  OK?!  And ever since I get the last wallet when I try to recover with the same seed! 

But I need the 1st wallet with the funds -  and for this I need the right derivation path - at least what I assume,   OK?!

iancoleman.io is a good website for it but it does not work with Electrum wallets.   



So, let's troubleshoot from here,  OK?!

Do you remember if what version of Electrum you used before you updated it to 3.3.8? Take note if it was from 3.3.3 or below version they are infected with phishing so if it shows a notice and forcing you to download the latest version and click the link you might be phished.

Or if you believe that it was from a different derivation path there is a tool that can scan all derivation paths and scan for used addresses with balances.
You can find the tool here https://blockpath.com/wallets/local/101?action=appxpub

Just open the Electrum wallet and look for wallet information and then copy the xPub and paste it there to scan.

Once it shows all used addresses and balances on the left side you will see the right derivation path of those addresses.

@bitmover

I tried them them all  & tons of different accounts      -     NOTHING!

As I wrote above in the post   -   the only derivation path that I see with some used addresses is  m/44'/0'/0'   -     rest NOTHING!

@Loyce V

No & No & No & No

Seed absolute perfect!    Not extended anything!     No maleware!       No BS!



Please    @evryone      CUT THIS SUGGESTIONS OFF!!!!



It has to do something with  creating that wallet  as a hardware wallet - I assume.  
Then deleted the wallet & all files.
Then updated  Electrum manager on Tails OS
And then generated with the same seed an online wallet
And now the "offline" wallet I cannot restore            
         __________something like that  -  so @ everyone please go ahead from this option onwards!

I'm having some slight troubles understanding what you're implying.

So first of all, if you've generated the wallet by selecting Standard Wallet > Create a New Seed, then there is no need to mess with any derivation path. The derivation path for Electrum standard seeds are always correct and has never changed.

The only reason why you would check "BIP39 Seed" is if you've used that previously *AND* sent your funds to it. If not, there is no need to check "BIP 39 seeds". Unless the user specifically asks for their seed to be imported as BIP39, then Electrum won't use BIP39 and you shouldn't restore your wallet using that.

Edit:

Slightly offtopic. FFS. There's really no point being frustrated with people trying to seek clarifications to your question.

You literally said:

then I get different addresses which I have used after I have updated the wallet.

And

If I don't check the BIP box then it generates the wallet I had after the update.

Those two statements would probably be confusing for most.
Also, there's obviously a bunch of misconceptions in your post and answering them individually would've helped us to narrow down and eliminate all the possibilities. I believe my question was completely reasonable given how your response was phrased. Well... Good luck if you're going to be pissed at people trying to help you.

THere are a couple of things you can try. This is the derivation path structure:


As your address starts with 1:

You can also try purpose 45' (you may have mistankely created a multisig wallet):
Your coins might be in a change address, so you need to try setting to 1 the value in change:

You also need to try some  accounts: 0, 1, 2 , as you may have mistankely created a new account inside your wallet , for example
(change address and account 1)

When you restore the E_Tails wallet from seed, do you see your test transaction? I found the answer: no.

Assuming you don't see it, I think it's most likely you somehow ended up with the wrong seed words. Or maybe you extended the seed phrase with your own password. Or your Windows may have been infected with clipboard malware. I'll strike this option out, because your addresses are in the picture you took:


If you took a picture of your seed words, it's also very unlikely you have the wrong seed words. Unless, somehow, the wallet you funded somehow used a different seed than the one in your picture.

Well, it can't be. Unless you forgot the additional password: Electrum didn't change.
But even if it did change, why don't you just go back to the older Tails version and try from there?

---

---

Too little too late: I always test a mnemonic before funding any address: I restore the wallet from seed and check if it gives the same address.

I'm still reading your older posts. Done!

---

---

After reading everything, any chance you clicked Options: "Extend this seed with custom words"? This seems like the most likely cause. That didn't happen either.

Yes it does generate.   I wrote it above.

Once I check the BIP39 and type in     only  followong derivation path:     m/44'/0'/0'      -   then I get different addresses which I have used after I have updated the wallet.     

If I don't check the BIP box then it generates the wallet I had after the update.

I tried all of them!    No coins are not there.     It's a legacy.     Would you read the post carefully.     

Thank you

I believe the issue is here.

What are the first 3 characters of the bitcoin address you want to recover? You are only searching for addresses that begin with 1.

There are 3 address formats in bitcoin network, and each has a different derivation path.


You should try 49 and 84 paths, your coins are probably there.

Electrum has never changed the derivation path for legacy wallets, AFAIK and it has always maintained backwards compatibility. Each of the seeds has a specific version to recover specific wallets and the fact that the checksum is valid for Electrum probably means that the seed is an Electrum seed.

Are the addresses in your recovered wallet bech32 (bc1) addresses? It is quite unlikely for that to happen.

Electrum doesn't store the phrases for BIP39 recovery. If the checksum is mismatching for BIP39, then you shouldn't be recovering using it. Any working wallet will not generate a seed that has a wrong checksum, because there'll be no use for a checksum.

Hello @everyone!
    
     Hope you doing Great.



I've got an issue with an Electrum wallet & with its transaction:

  - In September 2019 I have transfered coins from an
    Electrum wallet on Windows OS to an Electrum wallet on Tails OS
    and the coins got stucked on that BTC address & I can't get it back - I assume that address was created in different derivation path
    transaction ID: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/3eddcdcf82569329f2a110bda01e8dd889afd6df2501638f79fb92a5631e5c6a
    (2nd address in the screenshot) *Fiat currecny is at the time of transaction

  - had created a post on bitcointalk.org (in Spt. 2019) regarding that problem, after some inept tries through the suggestions I've
    got, I failed & leted it go.
    here is the link, in case it helps ahead:
    https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/electrum-to-electrum-transaction-lost-5187469
    or check uner my profile



Now, I don't quite remember how & what happend but here is the thing:

 1. I've created an Electrum wallet on Windows & Tails OS (will refer to it as E_Wind & E_Tails)

 2. Did a test transaction of BTC 0.000112 from E_Wind onto E_Tails - I could see the transaction straight away in Tails wallet. Was remarkably for a quite a long time displayed as "unconfirmed" & later on as "not verified" though, but I could see it at least in the wallet.
    transaction ID: https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/transaction/888f769c2d2585d1d6f0070f11d5820c249aa895fab983ce3eda7e1a667e7308
    (1st address in the screenshot)

 3. Then I did the bigger transaction & that transaction I couldn't see ever since.

 4. Turned out that the E_Tails was outdated but I was unaware of that, & so I tried different options to do something about, like followed the guide lines on tails website:
    to delete the wallet and recover it again

 5. So I did it. Deleted & recovered again - didn't work.

 6. I couldn't see the transaction because I couldn't connect to the servers because it was outdated. Which means I created E_Tails offline

 7. Then I understood that E_Tails is outdated on Tails OS and so I updated it to V. 3.3.8
    And here is where the SH!T starts boiling



 8. Since I've created it offline on outdated version & followingly deleted, as suggested in the guide lines - now that wallet was "gone"!

 9. As the E_Tails was now up-to-date, I wanted to recover that wallet
     Typed in the same mnemonic phrase, as before (when I tried to fix it myself without the guide lines) & now all of a sudden I get a
     different wallet with different addresses.

10. Ever since I type in the seed I always get this "newer" wallet and never the 1st one with the funds!





Here is what I assume:

    The seed has generated in first place a wallet with a different derivation path. The seed has
    generated the wallet while I was offline in Electrum manager - seems like that it was
    generated as a cold wallet/hardware wallet.

Here is why I assume:

    As I type in the same seed in Elcertum wallet & check the BIP39 box & following type the
    derivation path m/44'/0'/0' I get different addresses that I have used, after I updated the
    E_Tails (I see transactions on this addresses), opposed to if I just type in the seed without
    derivation path (there I see only 1 transaction on 1 address).

Here is the catch:

    If I check the BIP39 box and type in any derivation path (I tried planty of them) then Elcetrum
    tells me "checksum failed" & once I go ahead and am already in the wallet: go wallet > seed
        I can't display the seed.
        Where as if I just type in the seed without derivation path, I am able displaying the seed.




The point is - I need the correct derivation path - at least it is what I assume.
Q: How to get the correct derivation path for the 2 addresses where the funds are at?

I tried iancoleman.io - but of course it doesn't work with Electrum wallet, since Electrum does not support BIP39. Thus everytime an Electrum mnemonic phrase is typed in, it comes back with "invalid mnemonic".
There was another good website bitcoinfunction.com Somehow is not around anymore.
Q: Does anyone know websites alike?
Q: Could seedrecovery.py work, does it recover derivation paths? - It helps recovering the seed, but I know my seed, I don't need to recover it, right.




To make something clear: the seed is absoulute correct beacause I've used the same one to recover the "lost" wallet ----before I did the update---- and I did recover!

Here you can see the screenshot with the addresses of the "lost" wallet.
https://anonfiles.com/vdA86d26u4/ElectrumWallet_Tails_BTC_addresses_jpg


That is the address I need to recover & where the funds are at:
1LP6LQ726YJR9wkPLnHWJEfH335DDuiNtL (in screenshot second from the top)




Shall my assumption be incorrect, you're very welcome telling me what you think but be reasonable - stuff like wrong seed & etc. is out of question!




I appreciate all your contributions!



Thank you