Posts

Tangem Wallet Pack of 2 - Secure Crypto Wallet - Trusted Cold Storage for Bitcoin, Ethereum, NFT's &

Tangem Wallet Pack of 2 - Secure Crypto Wallet - Trusted Cold Storage for Bitcoin, Ethereum, NFT's &
Key item features Ultimate Security: Generates a private key that remains on the card, safeguarding crypto and NFTs from hackers with EAL6+ certification and audited firmware. Versatile Compatibility: Manages over 13,000 tokens across 70+ blockchains, supporting DeFi, NFTs, and DeEx without wires, Bluetooth, or USB. Effortless Operation: Utilizes NFC for secure transactions via a mobile device and the Tangem app, enabling buying and selling crypto with various payment methods. Smart Backup: Features a second Tangem Wallet as a backup, eliminating the need for paper, pictures, or seed phrases for recovery. Durable Design: Boasts IP68 protection against environmental conditions, ensuring longevity and robust physical security. Comprehensive Support: Compatible with Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, XRP, USDT, and over 6,000 cryptocurrencies, integrating with dApps and WalletConnect.

Are Xgram’s Cryptocurrency Exchange Rates Up to Date?

I’ve been looking into different sources of cryptocurrency market information and came across Xgram’s coin price page. It displays current prices for various cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, Litecoin and USDT, along with their 24-hour price changes. I’m curious how frequently these figures are updated and whether they accurately reflect current market conditions. Has anyone recently checked the prices on Xgram against other cryptocurrency market data platforms? Do the exchange rates remain consistent, or can there be noticeable differences depending on market fluctuations? I also noticed that Xgram offers an instant crypto exchange service with both fixed and floating rate options. It would be interesting to hear whether the displayed market prices are generally a reliable reference when comparing different cryptocurrencies. Has anyone explored this section of the website? I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts and experiences. from Rec...
Read more

LBANK

LBANK

Liana recovery path with a 24-word BIP39 seed when Liana's import only accepts 12 words?

I'm testing a Liana (v15.0) Simple Inheritance wallet on signet. The recovery key is a 24-word BIP39 seed ( [4adc83da/84'/1'/0']tpub... ). The timelock has expired and Liana has built the recovery PSBT, but: Liana's "Import mnemonic" screen only shows 12 word boxes Sparrow (2.5.6), with the same 24-word seed as a single-sig wpkh wallet, says "No open wallets can sign" for the PSBT Questions: Is there a supported way to sign a Liana recovery PSBT with a 24-word software seed, e.g. via Bitcoin Core ( walletprocesspsbt with an imported descriptor including the tprv)? Is the 12-word limit on Liana's hot-key import intentional? For an inheritance key, is 12 words (128-bit) considered sufficient, or should it stay 24? Signet only, no real funds. from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/D7MxlrY via IFTTT
Read more

Why do Bitcoin transactions sometimes take longer to confirm?

One thing that often confuses newer Bitcoin users is why a transaction can appear in a wallet but still not be fully confirmed. There are a few factors involved: Network congestion. Transaction fee rates. Miner prioritisation. The number of confirmations required by the receiving service. It's worth understanding these differences before using Bitcoin to make payments online. What's the longest confirmation delay you've experienced? from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/W5wfBsM via IFTTT
Read more

Why is my Bitcoin Core v32.1 MSVC build smaller than the official Windows release build?

I built Bitcoin Core v32.1 from source on Windows 11 26H2 + VS2026 18.11.3 using doc/build-windows-msvc.md build process and noticed that the resulting executables are all smaller than the official Windows release binaries (unsigned): Executable MSVC Build Official Build bitcoin.exe 0.5 MB 1.9 MB bitcoin-cli.exe 0.9 MB 2.3 MB bitcoin-tx.exe 2.8 MB 4.6 MB bitcoin-util.exe 1.9 MB 4.2 MB bitcoin-wallet.exe 4.7 MB 8.9 MB bitcoind.exe 12.6 MB 17.1 MB bitcoin-qt.exe 38.1 MB 44.7 MB Functional comparison bitcoind -help output appears identical except for the version string: My build: Bitcoin Core daemon version v32.1   Official build: Bitcoin Core daemon version v32.1.0 Question Is this size difference expected simply because of MSVC versus the official maybe WSL/Mingw-w64 toolchain, or is there some additional build configuration that explains why the official release binaries contain more code? Has anyone compared the generate...
Read more

How to Restore My Wallet Safely Enough Via Trezor Suite?

Using Trezor one, and have the 24 BIP 39 words secure. The first principle of security is, the BIP 39 seeds should not touch any device other than the Trezor one itself? So the question is, when I restore (via Trezor suite and my Ubuntu laptop), do I have to type in the words (on my laptop) to restore the wallet on my Trezor one? Is that a massive security gap? How best should I do it? from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/IeYnMFm via IFTTT
Read more

My bitcoinwallet has been emptied with AI. What can I do?

Yesterday my computer was hacked.I had no acces to any program. It takes hours before this problem was resolved. When I got exces to the programs my bitcoinwallet has been emptied with AI. What can I do?? from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/PgCmNyZ via IFTTT
Read more

Why does no Bitcoin opcode push data about the spending transaction onto the stack?

In Bitcoin Core, every method of BaseSignatureChecker that touches the spending transaction returns a bool: CheckSchnorrSignature, CheckLockTime (CLTV) and CheckSequence (CSV). Script supplies a parameter and gets back a yes/no answer, but no transaction data is ever pushed onto the stack. Was this “script asks, checker answers yes/no” separation a deliberate design principle, for example to keep script evaluation a pure function of (tx, prevouts), to allow validation caching, or to keep scripts easy to analyze? Or is it mostly a result of how the code evolved? I ask because covenant proposals seem to split along this line: OP_CHECKTEMPLATEVERIFY keeps the boolean pattern, while OP_TXHASH and OP_TEMPLATEHASH push a value onto the stack. Is there a known argument for why returning values to Script is a qualitatively bigger change than adding another boolean check? from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/YyILJoc via IFTTT
Read more