I retrieved the Xpriv from these two masterkeys and it gives me the wallet addresses. This wallet also contains mkey encrypted which decrypts well with my password.
The wallet.dat that interests me contains 4 derivation masterkey ( m). The first two are that of wallet.{timestamp}.bak. The masterkey encrypts mkey, salt, nderiv are the same as wallet.{timestamp}.bak.
But on the wallet.dat the masterkey does not decode the ckeys. It gives me different addresses when I use the masterkey. But its decrypt all the same adress than wallet.{timestamp}.bak.
I found in the wallet.dat unencrypted addresses.
I don't know how it is possible that the wallet.bak data is in my new wallet.dat and that the masterkey does not decrypt all the keys.
In summary it is as if the decryption keys of the wallet.dat are that of wallet.{timestamp}.bak. As if the mkey has been replaced by bitcoin core by the old wallet.
The wallet.dat that interests me contains 4 derivation masterkey ( m). The first two are that of wallet.{timestamp}.bak. The masterkey encrypts mkey, salt, nderiv are the same as wallet.{timestamp}.bak.
But on the wallet.dat the masterkey does not decode the ckeys. It gives me different addresses when I use the masterkey. But its decrypt all the same adress than wallet.{timestamp}.bak.
I found in the wallet.dat unencrypted addresses.
I don't know how it is possible that the wallet.bak data is in my new wallet.dat and that the masterkey does not decrypt all the keys.
In summary it is as if the decryption keys of the wallet.dat are that of wallet.{timestamp}.bak. As if the mkey has been replaced by bitcoin core by the old wallet.
So you seem to already know the password and also have a backup wallet.dat.
This seems to imply that Bitcoin Core has encrypted some of the mkeys with intermediate key at the time of crash. The question is, how is this key generated, and is the process even deterministic from the password?
This is what it seems to me, do you think that the encrypted mkey which encrypts the other addresses is represented with the salt and the nderiv in the wallet.dat, I can find a regular expression in order to scan all the possibilities and test them. Below is the code that is used to encrypt the wallet
Code:
bool CWallet::EncryptWallet(const SecureString& strWalletPassphrase)
{
if (IsCrypted())
return false;
CKeyingMaterial _vMasterKey;
_vMasterKey.resize(WALLET_CRYPTO_KEY_SIZE);
GetStrongRandBytes(&_vMasterKey[0], WALLET_CRYPTO_KEY_SIZE);
CMasterKey kMasterKey;
kMasterKey.vchSalt.resize(WALLET_CRYPTO_SALT_SIZE);
GetStrongRandBytes(&kMasterKey.vchSalt[0], WALLET_CRYPTO_SALT_SIZE);
CCrypter crypter;
int64_t nStartTime = GetTimeMillis();
crypter.SetKeyFromPassphrase(strWalletPassphrase, kMasterKey.vchSalt, 25000, kMasterKey.nDerivationMethod);
kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations = static_cast(2500000 / ((double)(GetTimeMillis() - nStartTime)));
nStartTime = GetTimeMillis();
crypter.SetKeyFromPassphrase(strWalletPassphrase, kMasterKey.vchSalt, kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations, kMasterKey.nDerivationMethod);
kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations = (kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations + static_cast(kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations * 100 / ((double)(GetTimeMillis() - nStartTime)))) / 2;
if (kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations < 25000)
kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations = 25000;
WalletLogPrintf("Encrypting Wallet with an nDeriveIterations of %i\n", kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations);
if (!crypter.SetKeyFromPassphrase(strWalletPassphrase, kMasterKey.vchSalt, kMasterKey.nDeriveIterations, kMasterKey.nDerivationMethod))
return false;
if (!crypter.Encrypt(_vMasterKey, kMasterKey.vchCryptedKey))
return false;
{
LOCK(cs_wallet);
mapMasterKeys[++nMasterKeyMaxID] = kMasterKey;
assert(!encrypted_batch);
encrypted_batch = new WalletBatch(*database);
if (!encrypted_batch->TxnBegin()) {
delete encrypted_batch;
encrypted_batch = nullptr;
return false;
}
encrypted_batch->WriteMasterKey(nMasterKeyMaxID, kMasterKey);
if (!EncryptKeys(_vMasterKey))
{
encrypted_batch->TxnAbort();
delete encrypted_batch;
encrypted_batch = nullptr;
// We now probably have half of our keys encrypted in memory, and half not...
// die and let the user reload the unencrypted wallet.
assert(false);
}
// Encryption was introduced in version 0.4.0
SetMinVersion(FEATURE_WALLETCRYPT, encrypted_batch, true);
if (!encrypted_batch->TxnCommit()) {
delete encrypted_batch;
encrypted_batch = nullptr;
// We now have keys encrypted in memory, but not on disk...
// die to avoid confusion and let the user reload the unencrypted wallet.
assert(false);
}
delete encrypted_batch;
encrypted_batch = nullptr;
Lock();
Unlock(strWalletPassphrase);
// if we are using HD, replace the HD seed with a new one
if (IsHDEnabled()) {
SetHDSeed(GenerateNewSeed());
}
NewKeyPool();
Lock();
// Need to completely rewrite the wallet file; if we don't, bdb might keep
// bits of the unencrypted private key in slack space in the database file.
database->Rewrite();
// BDB seems to have a bad habit of writing old data into
// slack space in .dat files; that is bad if the old data is
// unencrypted private keys. So:
database->ReloadDbEnv();
}
NotifyStatusChanged(this);
return true;
}
