Topic: Which wallet is working the best in face of malleability ? (Read 1736 times)
if you ask me i would suggest mycellium,i only use that...its quite good you can use it
Anything but Bitcoin Core is a risk to me. Sure im a paranoid, but as long as I can rull Bitcoin Core I will run it, that's I would hate so much that only big corporations can run nodes. I want to be able to run a node in my computer now and in 2064.
Bitcoin Core seems the most logical choice, I think. Armory allows you to handle this too, probably Electrum, but don't quote me on that. breadwallet also handles the situation quite well, but I'm not sure if it allows you to spend unconfirmed.
i used breadwallet for a while, then it absolutly shit it's self and never worked right agian. always frezzing and crashing
Bitcoin Core seems the most logical choice, I think. Armory allows you to handle this too, probably Electrum, but don't quote me on that. breadwallet also handles the situation quite well, but I'm not sure if it allows you to spend unconfirmed.
i used breadwallet for a while, then it absolutly shit it's self and never worked right agian. always frezzing and crashing
I think all wallets work similarly if not the same so I say it doesn't matter which one is selected.
I like to see topics like these discussed.
New users of BTC need to read threads like these and get informed as soon as possible.
We as a community need to do a better job of educating the general public.
The safer, easier, & faster the average users experience with bitcoin, the better.
With Apple pay rolling out new commercials lately, we need to be more vigilant in our efforts to educate people on why bitcoin is the single best form of payment for goods and services globally.
For the record, I have used BitcoinCore and MyCelium for a long time with no issues.
New users of BTC need to read threads like these and get informed as soon as possible.
We as a community need to do a better job of educating the general public.
The safer, easier, & faster the average users experience with bitcoin, the better.
With Apple pay rolling out new commercials lately, we need to be more vigilant in our efforts to educate people on why bitcoin is the single best form of payment for goods and services globally.
For the record, I have used BitcoinCore and MyCelium for a long time with no issues.
Rather than knowing the best wallet to use I'd like to know if there are any wallets we should avoid because of how they cope with malleability. Are they all OK if we wait for six confirmations or are there some that malfunction even after six confirmations?
-snip-
-snip-
A single confirmation should be enough. If want to avoid issues with orphaned blocks, go for two confirmations. Deeper reorgs of blocks are rare.
From what I read here, the most problematic wallet in that regard is blockchain.info. Not only did it handle the malleated TX badly, it also changed the balance to values that have nothing to do with the state of the blockchain. E.g. your balance could have doubled or gone negative. It also allowed you to build TX on top of this nonsense AFAIK. This might have been fixed durring their latest downtime, but I would still use a different wallet ASAP.
Rather than knowing the best wallet to use I'd like to know if there are any wallets we should avoid because of how they cope with malleability. Are they all OK if we wait for six confirmations or are there some that malfunction even after six confirmations? I haven't moved many Bitcoins since the attack so I have not experienced the malleability problem yet.
or at least offers a choice not to spend the UTXO ...
malleability is always from a corrupted (or not BIP66 enforced) branch of client "connected" to the bitcoin network.
Bitcoin usually clients can not use the respend feature of a successfully emited transaction.
I think, the one which does not spend UTXO or at least offers a choice not to spend the UTXO, will serve the best...
Use bitcoin-qt always.
Try the mycellium.
Since Trezor updated myTrezor.com have had no problems using Trezor either with it or Multibit HD.
Is Trezor wallet software implementing BIP 62?Trezor signs LowS confirmed.
Since Trezor updated myTrezor.com have had no problems using Trezor either with it or Multibit HD.
Is Trezor wallet software implementing BIP 62?
Since Trezor updated myTrezor.com have had no problems using Trezor either with it or Multibit HD.
As long as you stick to one of the main popular wallets I guess there won't be any problem. Just don't trust unconfirmed transactions and check balance with multiple block explorers that is not bc. I recommend btc.blockr.io
I don't know which one works the best, but I do know which one works the worst definitely.
Stay away from blockchain.info wallet !!!
Yeah, but at the moment, blockchain.info seems to have fixed it. No more negative or huge balances.
I think, the one which does not spend UTXO or at least offers a choice not to spend the UTXO, will serve the best...
I don't know which one works the best, but I do know which one works the worst definitely.
Stay away from blockchain.info wallet !!!
Yeah, but at the moment, blockchain.info seems to have fixed it. No more negative or huge balances.
I think, the one which does not spend UTXO or at least offers a choice not to spend the UTXO, will serve the best...
First of all, UTXO generally stands for Unspent tx(transaction) Outputs, and you must spend an unspent transaction output in order to create a valid transaction. Based on the title of this thread, I will assume that you are looking for a wallet that will not attempt to spend an unconfirmed output from a transaction that has not yet confirmed, and will answer accordingly.
No probs with mycelium here either.
I've just been a simpleton since my start in the bitcoin network. I've just been a die-hard Core/QT user. I understand that it's pointless for everyone to host a full-node, but it seems to always hold the "steadiest".
using MyCelium and no problems.
Bitcoin Core seems the most logical choice, I think. Armory allows you to handle this too, probably Electrum, but don't quote me on that. breadwallet also handles the situation quite well, but I'm not sure if it allows you to spend unconfirmed.
Electrum had problems with the attack, e.g. showing a wrong balance IIRC. I personally would agree with core, not only because it detects conflicting transactions which allow you to be aware of an issue. It also allows you to hand pick the inputs you use with coin controll enabled, thus even if you are waiting for your change from TX 1 to get confirmed you can use a different input for a 2nd TX right away. On top of that its the only major wallet[1] I have not seen anyone having issues with. That being said I also did not see any posts about issues with most mobile wallets, but I dont see many posts about them in general.
With all that being said, I would not switch my wallet just because of the attack. I would guess that most wallets that had massiv problems are not being improved.
i've heard that 1 confirmations, isn't enough to be sure that your transaction was pent, with this fancy attack?
i must wait for six confirmation for the time being? or i can... dunno, goes well with 3?
i must wait for six confirmation for the time being? or i can... dunno, goes well with 3?
One confirmation is enough, two if you want to make sure you dont catch an orphaned block. The important thing is that your wallet knows which is the correct TX ID. If it picks the one that does not get confirmed any following TX will not confirm either. Once any of the two TX is confirmed the other is invalid and should be gone from most mempools.
[1] Core, Multibit(HD), Electrum, blockchain.info are IMHO the major wallets discussed here.
Jump to: