slips VS blockbook

The official SLIP-0039 standard itself confirms it is not possible to convert this mnemonic type to BIP-0039. Down in Section 9 "Compatibility with BIP-039":

For anybody new or returning to SSS, check out SLIP-0039: https://github.com/satoshilabs/slips/blob/master/slip-0039.m...

One of the big downsides of SSS is that it’s very raw and you have to do a lot of legwork to make it actually useable. It’s rightfully criticized for this and the argument follows the don’t roll your own crypto vein.

SLIP39 solves this by formalizing a protocol for handling SSS splits built atop standards for crypto key serialization (BIP-39). SlIP shards are unique on each generation so parties with the same underlying SSS shard can’t compare mnemonics, they’re mnemonically serialized, and have a checksum and group index metadata which makes a more sane UX possible when combining.

Well every wallet chose to solve this problem independently. Trezor proposed a new standard called SLIP10 to do BIP44 type operations coins that did not use secp256k1. Problem is, there are very few utilities I've found that will do SLIP10 derivations.

Checkout the SLIPs repo (https://github.com/satoshilabs/slips.git) and modify testvectors.py. We are going to replace the curvenames and last four show_testvectors lines with the following:

They use an open source algorithm which is documented here. Anyone can verify it and the recovery outside of a Trezor hw-wallet is possible if required.

It will be using SLIP-39, like Trezor and Electrum, or a Ledger rewrite of it. All the language about shards is straight from the SLIP39 spec.

This was all done with the SLIP-14 seed using the passphrase coinjoin if you want to follow along.

With the introduction of the new Coinjoin feature in the latest release of firmware and software, I had the need to dump some of my taproot derivations. Although blockbook can do this fine using descriptors in place of xpubs for taproot accounts, it fails on Coinjoin accounts. This is likely because SLIP-25 as 6 deep derivations while BIP-86 uses a standard derivation depth of 5.

The recovery of Coinjoin accounts is described here. Accessing them outside of Trezor Suite will 100% destroy all privacy obtained since Suite is the only keeper of the anonymity set for each UTXO. Using your CJ coins outside of Suite may also erode the privacy of previous transactions using your Suite Private coins as well.

I went ahead and logged the issue on blockbook, so hopefully this won't be needed for long.

Sources: Trezor Forum, Reddit, Github

Hello, I am a software developer and currently developing a blockchain application. my application has many logic and one of them is need to get transaction information of different blockchain networks. I found Trezor's Blockbook solution (https://github.com/trezor/blockbook) that allows me to do this more easily. But my resources are very few. In addition I also found some open-source resources that connect to the public Blockbook (https://github.com/bitaccess/blockbook-client). Looks like it's connecting to your resources here ('btc1.trezor.io', 'btc2.trezor.io'). So I would like to ask if I implement a Blockchain solution that sends large amount of network data to these Trezor public Blockbooks, will there be any problem?

Nice, dont you have to give credit to trezor on the explorer page though https://github.com/trezor/blockbook/blob/master/COPYING

I have built and sync'd the Trezor custom backend, Blockbook, on a local VM running on my local network. Trezor Suite refuses to connect to it:

Settings > Crypto > Hover over your coin of choice > Click the cog > Change the default "Trezor servers" to "Custom Blockbook server". https://github.com/trezor/blockbook

I just found the answer to my own question. You can also host the Trezor server part yourself with https://github.com/trezor/blockbook so that you are not relying on any Trezor service at all to continue working.

In fact, you can already use custom node when you run Blockbook.

I think this might be related to this issue? I've had a few others tell me that trezor doesn't keep track well once internal txns get involved. https://github.com/trezor/blockbook/issues/125