As of 29a8c41025971140b0055b11fa8f86a4a3f81b17, when calling ismine
, electrum will test:
- If identified derived addresses include the goal deal with
- If addresses which were imported into the pockets (usually, for non-hierarchical wallets) include the goal deal with
It won’t try to look as-of-yet not within the database, however theoretically derivable addresses from the identical seed.
Such a search would all the time be non-exhaustive. Given the potential mixtures for derivation paths, and the ~4 billion addresses at every stage, you’ll be able to’t actually conclusively show that an deal with is not in a given pockets. You would exhaustively search a single BIP32 account, however even that may be extraordinarily gradual given the sheer variety of addresses you would need to derive. No pockets that I am conscious of does this.
As of 29a8c41025971140b0055b11fa8f86a4a3f81b17, when calling ismine
, electrum will test:
- If identified derived addresses include the goal deal with
- If addresses which were imported into the pockets (usually, for non-hierarchical wallets) include the goal deal with
It won’t try to look as-of-yet not within the database, however theoretically derivable addresses from the identical seed.
Such a search would all the time be non-exhaustive. Given the potential mixtures for derivation paths, and the ~4 billion addresses at every stage, you’ll be able to’t actually conclusively show that an deal with is not in a given pockets. You would exhaustively search a single BIP32 account, however even that may be extraordinarily gradual given the sheer variety of addresses you would need to derive. No pockets that I am conscious of does this.