Topic: Ledger Live Nano missing btc (Read 455 times)

If you are using an app, then it must be running on something, so you have to trust the hardware manufacturers and the delivery chain that delivered that hardware to you. As you say, you can expand on this endlessly. At some point you will always be trusting someone for something.

The same is true in your daily life. You trust complete strangers that you have never met to keep you alive at all times - every architect and builder to make sure the buildings you enter don't collapse on you, every city engineer to make sure the gas pipes don't explode under the street, everyone involved in designing and building the car/bus/train/tram/whatever you ride to work to make sure doesn't derail/malfunction/crash/explode, everyone involved in growing, harvesting, preparing, packaging, delivering, and serving your food to not make you ill, etc.

It's all about risk. Does using a hardware wallet bring with it a level of risk? Of course. Does using a cold wallet or paper wallet bring with it a level of risk? Also yes.

If you can set up a paper wallet completely offline, using human generated entropy by flipping a coin, converting your coin flips to a seed manually, leaving no traces, etc., etc., then sure, such a set up would be more secure than a hardware wallet. However, such a set up is also not an option for >99% of crypto users, and while it brings with it a lower risk of trusting third parties, it brings with it a much higher risk of messing up, doing something wrong, and either losing access to your coins or your coins being stolen.

For the vast majority of crypto users, a hardware wallet is the best balance between security and simplicity.

It's highly likely you're trusting someone somewhere along the chain... Unless you have created a handcrafted paperwallet, with a selfcoded app to convert your dicerolls/coin flips into a private key.

Otherwise, you're trusting your wallet software (yes, even 'open source' unless you have diligently checked every line of code in the wallet and every line of code in every library that the wallet uses)... you're trusting your OS... you're trusting your hardware... you're trusting your PRNG etc...

The "rabbit hole" for this goes deep.


Hardware wallets provide a nice blend of security and convenience. You get a nice mix of the "ease of use" and convenience of hot wallets and security of cold wallets with the keys being "shielded" from the world.

"Don't Trust, Verify" is a nice ideal... but in practical terms very difficult to get 100%.

Am I the only one who thinks it's unwise to store the bulk of your wealth in a hardware wallet? 

Lets forget about the five-dollar-wrench attack vector for a minute, the the philosophy of a hardware wallet is contradictory to the principals of bitcoin's creation.  It's a third party device that we are trusting with our wealth.  Don't get me wrong, I use a hardware wallet and don't feel threatened, but lets look at it for what it really is.  Ledger's firmware isn't open source, and although highly unlikely, there could be a something malicious embedded in it's code.  The Trezor is open source, but that leaves it vulnerable if it's physically attacked.

If I were to make anthologies; I would categorize wallets in this fashion: A hot wallet I would consider as cash in my pocket, a hardware wallet I would consider as a checking account, and a cold wallet I would consider my savings or retirement accounts, and I store my wealth accordingly.

Well, if this is a concern for you then set up two passphrases. Have a very small amount in the "base" addresses, and a little bit more in under the first passphrase - a small enough amount that it isn't a huge deal if you lose it, but a large enough amount to make it seem worthwhile to be using a hardware wallet. Store the main bulk of your funds under a second passphrase. That way you can given an attacker the base wallet and the first passphrase, and still have your second passphrase securing the bulk of your funds. Only if you have been careless enough to either broadcast the fact you have a second passphrase, or obviously linked all the wallets together using blockchain analytics, will an attacker even know a second passphrase exists.

Still worried an attacker might continue to push after you reveal the first passphrase? Then set up three, or four, or ten. Or store the majority of your funds on a completely unknown and hidden airgapped device or paper wallet. If an attack is targeted and well-prepared, as you say, then it makes no difference where you store your funds. If they know you own them, they can continue until you hand them over.

Only in a situation where the attacker is a person who does not know the capabilities of the hardware wallet, and who is naive enough to believe that someone has a hardware wallet with a few dozen dollars on the accounts. When someone puts a gun to your head or a knife to your throat, you have to be a big fool not to answer every question. Also, such physical attacks are almost always targeted and well-prepared.

Passphrase is a very good extra protection for seed (in case of Trezor wallets highly recommended), but as we have seen in the OP case, it is not something to be taken lightly, because many will face the same problem in the future - they will have seed, but they will not be able to remember of passphrase.

And thank you for taking the time to come back and explain what the solution was and provide a good detailed explanation of how you solved your issue. Too many times, we either get a post that just says something like "Solved!" or "Fixed it!" and provides zero details which is completely useless to anyone searching through threads looking for similar issues... or the user simply disappears into the ether and no one knows what the end result was.

Kudos to you... glad you got it sorted.

Some great news in some trying times! Really glad you managed to recover your coins.

Using a passphrase like this provides two benefits. If your 24 word seed back up is compromised, then as you just discovered, no one will be able to access your coins without also knowing or guessing your passphrase. You should keep your passphrase backed up separately to your seed phrase so if someone discovers one, they don't immediately have the other.

It also provides plausible deniability in the case of a physical attack against your person. You can unlock with the original PIN and show the attacker accounts which are either empty or hold a small amount of coins. The attacker has no way of knowing about additional coins which are hidden behind the secondary PIN.

 .  Quick update guys.  I just recovered the accounts!  So the culprit was the 25th word.  After all this time I had not remembered that I added a passphrase!  Many of you had suggested that the passphrase could be wrong which pushed me to look into the BIP39 passphrase set up process and my old records again (more thoroughy).  And I realized I set up a 25th word (passphrase)! 

Steps I took:
I reset my wallet and reinstalled ledger to be safe.
Did a restore and entered my seed words.  Set up ledger live linked to wallet.
Installed bitcoin app and added bitcoin accounts.

At this point everything was the same.  0 balance on both segwit and non.

I navigated to settings, security, passphrase, set up passphrase, attach to PIN.  This wasn't very obvious, to me at least, because if you had forgotten you had attached a passphrase to begin with this step feels like setting up a brand new passphrase.
I set up a secondary PIN and "set up" a passphrase using the passphrase I recovered in my records.

After process was complete, unplugged nano and at PIN prompt I entered my secondary pin attached to my passphrase I had just set up.
I went to add accounts and voila!  What a load off!
 

Thank you guys for taking your time to answer questions and discuss and not judge me too much, as I'm still learning this.  I learned a lot of things and every suggestion you guys made helped me find a solution. 

That's actually a good point.  I'm not counting out the possibility of wrong seeds as many have suggested but had I gotten them wrong shouldn't I have gotten a "incorrect seed" prompt?  And having two or more recorded in the wrong order is even more of an impossibility to me.  Just my opinion. 

So I'm wrestling with the possibility that in the course of a year not only have I gotten a year older but what if I've also lost some brain cells in the process.  And if there is a possibility I created a passphrase that I don't recall I should consider it.

So if I understand correctly, having reset the device, the passphrase will still exist but the secondary PIN I associated with the passphrase is wiped?  Is that correct?  In other words if I go through the process "settings, security, passphrase, set up passphrase, attach to PIN", then I can set up a new secondary PIN and as long as I get the passphrase right during this process, the correct accounts should be able to be added?  I guess I'm also trying to figure out if this is how to validate a passphrase since I don't ever recall being prompted for one.

So the original derivation paths gave me matches to my empty receiving addresses.  When I set up a default wallet with p2sh segwit I left the derivation path as it was, e.g. m/49'/0'/0'.  I tried the same with native segwit with m/84'/0'/0' which also yielded a match to my empty receiving address (I have 2 empty accounts populated in my ledger live.  But in the list of address on both accounts there is no match to the addresses with my original coin transactions.

I am almost certain I have the right seeds and compared with the bips github just to be on the safe side.

I don't recall ever setting a passphrase to my hardware wallet.  Previously accessing my wallet required my pin only and I had no issues.  Also it doesn't prompt me to enter a passphrase, either when I activate it or when I do a soft reset (restore from previous).

I just reset the cache and still the same results.  I'm still waiting on their reply.  Given the current situation I am expecting a bit of a wait.

I just checked the twitter and that's interesting.  I wonder if what they're describing applies to me, my accounts don't add up to anything but 0.  Also have my fingers crossed that whatever bugs they end up squashing might help anyone in my situation.

If was trying an invalid seed phrase, the Ledger device would not accept it. With a 24 word phrase, there is only a 1 in 256 chance of swapping a word and the seed still being valid, so it is unlikely this is the case. It could be an entirely different seed altogether, though.

He reset the device during the update process, so any passphrases attached to secondary PINs will have been wiped. If the issue here is a passphrase, the only chance to recover the coins will be to remember the passphrase.

I suspected that jeje10036's problem is with this seed phrase from the start.  He either wrote it down wrong, reading it wrong, entering it wrong, or he forgot that he updated his seed at some point, and he's using the wrong one all together.  There's also a distinct possibility that he attached a Bip39 passphrase to a secondary pin, which he's forgotten.  If his memory is as shot as mine, the fact that he hasn't tried to access his wallet in some time isn't helping him.

@jeje10036, I would suggest you try to recall if you have updated the seed at any point in the past, or if you had created a secondary PIN.  If you reuse PINs It might be worth trying others that you have used in the past.  If all else fails, continue to compare the seed words you have to similar words on the Bip39 list, maybe you wrote one down wrong, and it'll become obvious to you when you seed the comparisons side by side.

This situation should stress to all of us how important it is to keep accurate records of all your cyrpto information, even the old stuff that you plan to never use again.

Another thing that should be stressed with HD wallets (hardware or otherwise) is to confirm that you have written down the correct seed.  Every time I create a new seed, I create a watch-only version of that wallet, then destroy the original.  I then restore the wallet from seed and compare it to the watch only wallet.  That's the only way I verify seed phrases, no other method instills such confidence.  It can be a pain in the ass with a 24-word seed and picking one character at a time on a hardware wallet, but it's money we're talking about and the confidence is worth the effort.

But if you look at OP post with screenshot, problem is not only with Ledger Live, but also with Electrum. We can conclude that it's not about the user interface, but that OP is not entering correct seed, or he is forgotten that he set passphrase with his account.


That tweet is about portfolio value, in case presented by OP it's about something else entirely. The fact that the seed does not create addresses that should be recovered clearly shows where the problem really is.

---

I recently checked my seed using two Ledger devices (S&X), and encountered no problem - all accounts/addresses have been successfully created by using seed from S model on X model.

I concur... it's looking more likely to be caused by either:

1. BIP39 Passphrase

or

2. Incorrect backup seed

In both of these cases, recovery could prove very difficult if OP doesn't recall details of either

Did any of the derivation paths generate an address which matches your currently empty receiving address on Ledger Live? Which one?

This is very strange. Are you absolutely sure you didn't previously use a passphrase and link it to a PIN on your hardware wallet? Are you absolutely sure you restored from the correct seed phrase for this wallet?

Have you tried to clear cache the Ledger live?
If not yet try it first so that it will resync again or reinstall the ledger live and make sure to download the latest one because they recently updated their ledger live. Or try the ledger live on mobile it maybe shows the correct BTC addresses and balance.

If it still doesn't work try to contact the support of Ledger nano they might be able to solve this issue.

- https://support.ledger.com/hc/en-us/requests/new

---

It seems a bug according to ledger support from twitter here https://twitter.com/ledger_support/status/1242808607504203778?s=21

I just tried those steps and no luck.  I tried the different variations for derivation paths for p2sh-segwit (at least 4) and did the same as well for native and legacy just in case.  Each time I deleted the default wallet and started over.

https://i.ibb.co/sKxbzBK/Screen-Shot-2020-03-31-at-1-28-13-PM.png

This is what I'm seeing each time.

I'm curious about this (and hopeful for the OP that it's that simple,) but if, for example, I had created two Ledger accounts, and then emptied the first, wouldn't Ledger Live still import that account since it has transactions in it?  If that is what's going on with the OP's situation, wouldn't he at least see some transactions in that first account, and wouldn't Ledger Live allow him to create (or import) the next account in that case?

Provided that the wallet was set up using Ledger Live, your seed is correct, and you didn't use a passphrase, then I agree that multiple accounts is the most likely culprit here.

Follow DireWolfM14's links above regarding how to download, verify, and install Electrum. Create a new wallet by selecting "Standard wallet", "Use a hardware device", and then "Next" on the screen with your Ledger device selected. Choose "p2sh-segwit" on the next screen. This should show you a derivation path of m/49'/0'/0' at the bottom. Create this wallet and check for any balance. (It would also be useful to check if the any of the addresses in this wallet match up with the empty addresses you can currently see in Ledger Live.)

If all those addresses are empty, then repeat the steps above, but change the derivation path to m/49'/0'/1'. Then again with m/49'/0'/2'. I'd probably try 5 or 10 accounts just be sure.