• About
  • FAQ
  • Privacy Policy
  • Support Forum
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact Us
Newsletter
Token Alytics
  • Home
  • Bitcoin
  • Blockchain
  • Cryptocurrency
  • Defi
  • Ripple
  • Ethereum
  • Metaverse
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Bitcoin
  • Blockchain
  • Cryptocurrency
  • Defi
  • Ripple
  • Ethereum
  • Metaverse
No Result
View All Result
Token Alytics
No Result
View All Result
Home Bitcoin

lightning community – Essential Discrepancy: Bitcoin Core Node Sees UTXO through scantxoutset, BUT listunspent & Sparrow Pockets Fail; Handle Undrivable from LND Key?

thecryptogoblin by thecryptogoblin
April 21, 2025
in Bitcoin
0
189
SHARES
1.5k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter


Good day LND Builders and Neighborhood,

I am dealing with a extremely uncommon and demanding concern the place on-chain funds related to a previous LND channel closure are inaccessible, regardless of my Bitcoin Core node (v29.0.0, RPi5, totally synced after recent IBD, txindex=1) confirming the UTXO’s existence through scantxoutset. Nonetheless, each listunspent and exterior pockets software program (Sparrow) miss out on this UTXO, and crucially, the tackle holding the funds can’t be derived from my LND root key utilizing customary strategies.

System & Historical past:

LND: v0.18.5-beta (upgraded from v0.5.2-beta). Confirmed just one pockets.db used all through.

Bitcoin Core: v29.0.0 (RPi5), totally synced post-IBD, txindex=1 studies synced: true. Datadir /mnt/hdd/bitcoin.

Channel Historical past: Opened Mar 2019 (LND v0.5.2, Funding Tx: 7060…9d71), later force-closed by peer.

Sweep Transaction: On Apr 1, 2024 (Block 837257), Tx 4c0407b1188e0ba39313b1d9c87c49f6c81d99aa2839026c8af8c989ce102244 spent the channel output, sending ~0.01495 BTC to P2WPKH tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz.

On-Chain Verification: Explorers affirm this UTXO (4c04…:0) exists and is unspent at bc1qt7…g8qz.

The Core Downside & Contradictions:

After a full IBD and making certain txindex is synced on my Bitcoin Core node:

getrawtransaction 4c04... true SUCCEEDS: The node is aware of the historical past of the funding transaction.

scantxoutset begin '["addr(bc1qt7...)"]' SUCCEEDS and RETURNS THE UTXO: This instantly confirms that the node’s chainstate (UTXO set) database IS CORRECT and accommodates the unspent output for bc1qt7…g8qz.

{
  "success": true, ...
  "unspents": [ { "txid": "4c04...", "vout": 0, ... "address": "bc1qt7...", "amount": 0.01495437 ... } ],
  "total_amount": 0.01495437
}

listunspent ... '["bc1qt7..."]' (utilizing -rpcwallet="" or different loaded wallets) returns []: Regardless of the UTXO present within the chainstate, the wallet-specific RPC name fails to listing it.

Sparrow Pockets (recent set up, related to this node) exhibits 0 steadiness: When importing the confirmed LND root xprv and configuring for BIP84 (m/84’/0’/0′, Native Segwit P2WPKH), Sparrow completes scanning however exhibits 0 steadiness and lists no UTXOs, failing to see the UTXO that the node is aware of exists (per scantxoutset).

Parallel Pockets Derivation Failure:

Utilizing the confirmed root xprv (extracted from the proper pockets.db through chantools showrootkey), intensive checks with offline instruments (bip39-standalone.html) on customary BIP84 paths (m/84’/0’/0’/0/* and m/84’/0’/0’/1/*) did not derive the tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz after checking thousands and thousands of addresses.

Present Standing & Pressing Questions:

I’ve on-chain funds at bc1qt7…g8qz that my node essentially is aware of about (per scantxoutset), however that are inaccessible through customary pockets RPCs (listunspent) and exterior wallets (Sparrow). Compounding that is the failure to derive this particular tackle from the LND root key utilizing customary BIP84 paths.

Searching for knowledgeable assistance on:

Why would listunspent (even with the proper pockets specified) and exterior wallets like Sparrow miss out on a UTXO when scantxoutset on the identical node confirms its existence within the UTXO set? Is that this a recognized Core bug, a difficulty with how wallets question non-owned addresses, or one thing else?

Given the derivation failure, is it doable for LND (esp. after main model jumps) to comb funds to an tackle not derivable through customary BIP84 paths from the aezeed root key? Might a bug or particular state result in utilizing a distinct derivation scheme or perhaps a key unrelated to the primary pockets for sweep outputs?

Are there any superior strategies or instruments (LND debug instructions, particular chantools utilization, various pockets software program recognized to deal with edge circumstances) that might both:

a) Power Sparrow/LND to acknowledge the UTXO primarily based on the node’s chainstate affirmation?

b) Assist definitively hint the derivation path (even when non-standard) used to generate bc1qt7…g8qz from my pockets.db/xprv?

This example appears extremely anomalous. Any insights or steering could be extraordinarily appreciated.

Thanks.

Related articles

Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

June 8, 2025
FCA Proposes Lifting Ban on Crypto ETNs for UK Retail Buyers

FCA Proposes Lifting Ban on Crypto ETNs for UK Retail Buyers

June 8, 2025


Good day LND Builders and Neighborhood,

I am dealing with a extremely uncommon and demanding concern the place on-chain funds related to a previous LND channel closure are inaccessible, regardless of my Bitcoin Core node (v29.0.0, RPi5, totally synced after recent IBD, txindex=1) confirming the UTXO’s existence through scantxoutset. Nonetheless, each listunspent and exterior pockets software program (Sparrow) miss out on this UTXO, and crucially, the tackle holding the funds can’t be derived from my LND root key utilizing customary strategies.

System & Historical past:

LND: v0.18.5-beta (upgraded from v0.5.2-beta). Confirmed just one pockets.db used all through.

Bitcoin Core: v29.0.0 (RPi5), totally synced post-IBD, txindex=1 studies synced: true. Datadir /mnt/hdd/bitcoin.

Channel Historical past: Opened Mar 2019 (LND v0.5.2, Funding Tx: 7060…9d71), later force-closed by peer.

Sweep Transaction: On Apr 1, 2024 (Block 837257), Tx 4c0407b1188e0ba39313b1d9c87c49f6c81d99aa2839026c8af8c989ce102244 spent the channel output, sending ~0.01495 BTC to P2WPKH tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz.

On-Chain Verification: Explorers affirm this UTXO (4c04…:0) exists and is unspent at bc1qt7…g8qz.

The Core Downside & Contradictions:

After a full IBD and making certain txindex is synced on my Bitcoin Core node:

getrawtransaction 4c04... true SUCCEEDS: The node is aware of the historical past of the funding transaction.

scantxoutset begin '["addr(bc1qt7...)"]' SUCCEEDS and RETURNS THE UTXO: This instantly confirms that the node’s chainstate (UTXO set) database IS CORRECT and accommodates the unspent output for bc1qt7…g8qz.

{
  "success": true, ...
  "unspents": [ { "txid": "4c04...", "vout": 0, ... "address": "bc1qt7...", "amount": 0.01495437 ... } ],
  "total_amount": 0.01495437
}

listunspent ... '["bc1qt7..."]' (utilizing -rpcwallet="" or different loaded wallets) returns []: Regardless of the UTXO present within the chainstate, the wallet-specific RPC name fails to listing it.

Sparrow Pockets (recent set up, related to this node) exhibits 0 steadiness: When importing the confirmed LND root xprv and configuring for BIP84 (m/84’/0’/0′, Native Segwit P2WPKH), Sparrow completes scanning however exhibits 0 steadiness and lists no UTXOs, failing to see the UTXO that the node is aware of exists (per scantxoutset).

Parallel Pockets Derivation Failure:

Utilizing the confirmed root xprv (extracted from the proper pockets.db through chantools showrootkey), intensive checks with offline instruments (bip39-standalone.html) on customary BIP84 paths (m/84’/0’/0’/0/* and m/84’/0’/0’/1/*) did not derive the tackle bc1qt728qplpuh6d98evkl4a990zdhwpwvur6qg8qz after checking thousands and thousands of addresses.

Present Standing & Pressing Questions:

I’ve on-chain funds at bc1qt7…g8qz that my node essentially is aware of about (per scantxoutset), however that are inaccessible through customary pockets RPCs (listunspent) and exterior wallets (Sparrow). Compounding that is the failure to derive this particular tackle from the LND root key utilizing customary BIP84 paths.

Searching for knowledgeable assistance on:

Why would listunspent (even with the proper pockets specified) and exterior wallets like Sparrow miss out on a UTXO when scantxoutset on the identical node confirms its existence within the UTXO set? Is that this a recognized Core bug, a difficulty with how wallets question non-owned addresses, or one thing else?

Given the derivation failure, is it doable for LND (esp. after main model jumps) to comb funds to an tackle not derivable through customary BIP84 paths from the aezeed root key? Might a bug or particular state result in utilizing a distinct derivation scheme or perhaps a key unrelated to the primary pockets for sweep outputs?

Are there any superior strategies or instruments (LND debug instructions, particular chantools utilization, various pockets software program recognized to deal with edge circumstances) that might both:

a) Power Sparrow/LND to acknowledge the UTXO primarily based on the node’s chainstate affirmation?

b) Assist definitively hint the derivation path (even when non-standard) used to generate bc1qt7…g8qz from my pockets.db/xprv?

This example appears extremely anomalous. Any insights or steering could be extraordinarily appreciated.

Thanks.

Tags: addressBitcoinCoreCriticalDiscrepancyFailKeylightninglistunspentLNDNetworknodescantxoutsetSeessparrowUndrivableutxoWallet
Share76Tweet47

Related Posts

Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

by thecryptogoblin
June 8, 2025
0

Be a part of Our Telegram channel to remain updated on breaking information protection Arca CIO Jeff Dorman has slammed...

FCA Proposes Lifting Ban on Crypto ETNs for UK Retail Buyers

FCA Proposes Lifting Ban on Crypto ETNs for UK Retail Buyers

by thecryptogoblin
June 8, 2025
0

The UK’s high monetary regulator simply made a shocking pivot. The Monetary Conduct Authority (FCA), recognized for its cautious stance...

Ethereum Enters Strategic Pause: Will Accumulation Beneath Resistance Spark A Surge?

Ethereum Enters Strategic Pause: Will Accumulation Beneath Resistance Spark A Surge?

by thecryptogoblin
June 8, 2025
0

Trusted Editorial content material, reviewed by main trade consultants and seasoned editors. Advert Disclosure In a publish shared on X...

XRP Worth Dangers Plummeting Beneath $2 As Sellers Take Management

XRP Worth Dangers Plummeting Beneath $2 As Sellers Take Management

by thecryptogoblin
June 7, 2025
0

Cause to belief Strict editorial coverage that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality Created by trade consultants and meticulously reviewed...

Bitcoin 2025 Las Vegas: Right here’s What Went Down

Bitcoin 2025 Las Vegas: Right here’s What Went Down

by thecryptogoblin
June 7, 2025
0

My title is Jenna Montgomery, and perhaps you’ve learn a few of my information articles right here earlier than, or...

Load More
  • Trending
  • Comments
  • Latest
CryptoRank Telegram Airdrop Information | How To Take part

CryptoRank Telegram Airdrop Information | How To Take part

September 7, 2024

bitcoin core – mandatory-script-verify-flag-failed (Script evaluated with out error however completed with a false/empty prime stack component) on wrapped SegWit enter

December 24, 2024
How Essential is Jito Solana MEV Bot Growth for the Cryptocurrency Ecosystem?

How Essential is Jito Solana MEV Bot Growth for the Cryptocurrency Ecosystem?

August 1, 2024
Lumina Hunt Telegram Sport Airdrop Information

Lumina Hunt Telegram Sport Airdrop Information

October 23, 2024

Ethereum Whales Quickly Accumulate ETH Amid Worth Decline

0

How Can a Web3 Neobanking Platform Be Useful for the Decentralized Enterprise Area?

0

2024 Recreation Growth Traits: Alternatives & Challenges | by Jon Radoff | Constructing the Metaverse

0

Prime Ethereum Analyst Says DOGE, PEPE, and RCOF Are About to Expertise a ‘Historic Breakout’

0
Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

June 8, 2025
FLY is obtainable for buying and selling!

FLY is obtainable for buying and selling!

June 8, 2025
Technical Pressure Builds for XRP—Whales Stack 190M Tokens

Technical Pressure Builds for XRP—Whales Stack 190M Tokens

June 8, 2025
Ripple Information: Three Key Components That May Drive XRP Worth Increased in June

XRP Mirrors Tesla’s Early Setbacks—Is a 30x Rally Rally Nonetheless on the Desk?

June 8, 2025

Token Alytics

We are a team of dedicated enthusiasts, analysts, and writers with a shared interest in the dynamic and fast-paced world of digital assets and blockchain innovation. Our diverse backgrounds in finance, technology, and media give us a unique perspective on the developments in the crypto space.

Categories

  • Bitcoin
  • Blockchain
  • Cryptocurrency
  • Defi
  • Ethereum
  • Metaverse
  • Ripple

Follow Us

  • 643 Followers

Recent News

Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

Arca Slams Circle For “Measly” IPO Allocation, Vows To Minimize Ties

June 8, 2025
FLY is obtainable for buying and selling!

FLY is obtainable for buying and selling!

June 8, 2025
  • About
  • FAQ
  • Privacy Policy
  • Support Forum
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact Us

© 2018- tokenalytics.io, All rights reserved

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Bitcoin
  • Blockchain
  • Cryptocurrency
  • Defi
  • Ripple
  • Ethereum
  • Metaverse

© 2018- tokenalytics.io, All rights reserved