Hey everyone, I've been digging into the whole Bitcoin inheritance thing here and found various discussions on it.
Some threads mainly talk about time-locked transactions, but there's a flaw in that approach: what if the heir doesn’t even have a Bitcoin address?
I’m kinda new to this, but I want to share my idea. Please don’t brush it off just because I'm new here, I appreciate any feedback!
So here’s my idea:
What if we set up a system where both the holder and the heir have separate seed phrases? One for the holder and another for the heir.
Here’s how it could work:
- The heir’s seed phrase wouldn’t let them access the wallet until a certain number of years, let’s say N, as decided by the holder.
- Only after those N years could the heir gain access to the wallet.
Now, here’s a question:
What if the holder is still alive when those N years come up?
Well, then the holder would just need to log in a day before that period ends to change the duration.
Just a note: N can be any whole number like 1, 2, 3, etc.
Benefits of this idea:
- Only the holder can access the account until they pass away.
- This method reduces the risk of the heir doing anything harmful to the holder just to get to the inheritance money early.
I’m not a dev, just sharing thoughts for the community and the developers, so let me know if this idea makes any sense.
This would be done through a Bitcoin script.
I think your proposal is quite similar to a thread that was started a week or two
So I'd share what I shared.
Again is quite similar to previous opinions so I can't really tell the difference.
No set up is 100% Risk free.
Do realize that if the heir have seed phrase, that means the heir can use Bitcoin wallet software to generate address?
Bitcoin itself is decentralized, so "login" doesn't make sense here. It would make sense if we talk about centralized inheritance service.
I'm not an expert, but I think it should be possible to send bitcoins to a script containing two addresses. One address can unlock the UTXO at any time and the other can unlock the UTXO after a certain time with OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY. The owner would provide the first address and the heir would provide the second address.
FYI, Bitcoin transactions know nothing about seeds and wallets.
Of course it is possible. For example:
And then, it can be executed as:
But also as:
Then, it is just a matter of extending some conditions. For example:
let's say, the owner sets the timing to say 5 years before the second address is able to spend the funds or 1 year,, this is just for example
but due to unforeseen circumstances s/he dies before 5 years or 1 year and his key gets into wrong hands?
what happens then?
the nominee still cannot use the funds left for them by their father because the time hasn't passed and the one who finds the owner's key gets to steal the funds?
This point you are trying to make has no direct impact on the usefulness of this proposed idea. A key can be stolen at any time depending on the circumstances involved whether or not there are provisions for any inheritance.
In my own understanding, the proposed idea is to protect the owner from the successors who might want a quick inheritance and it has no business with a third party stealing the key as keys can be stolen whether the funds are inheritable or not. Don't you think so?
yes, ur right, this idea does prevent the successor from using the owner's funds before the set time.
and yes, a key can be stolen with or without implementation of this idea and it doesn't makes a difference.
i guess owner would have to just keep his seed written somewhere & the passphrase in his mind, so the funds remain safe even if someone gets hold of the seed.
this is very interesting i must say,, will this work using electrum wallet? can someone make a guide, so i can try this using testnet coins?
More straightforward setup would be:
-The wallet/address that holds the stash will remain inaccessible to the heirs SEED/private key until the holder has been inactive for N years.
- The heir with his SEED/prvkey will only be able to access the wallet/address after N years of the holder's inactivity.
Such setup can be realized with the use of Liana wallet.
If I may, I'll like to add another feature to your suggestions.
Now, after the heir has successfully gain access to the wallet/address after N years, it will be nice that he/she is able to add another heir to the wallet/address, and the cycle repeats.
I know I might sound dumb, but it's just an opinion from a curious newbie.
EDIT: For some of us raising issues about the suggestion seedphrase system by @Alvin_talk being compromised, are you trying to say wallet addresses cannot be stolen under the single seedphrase system? Come on guys, let's give this brilliant mind his trophy.
I think so too, the only missing link here is for someone to build an user friendly GUI that makes this trivial to do for anyone who wants it. I don't think overly complicated inheritance protocols are needed. If someone needs such a solution, they can invest money to develop something custom themselves. Overall, the more complicated it is and the more time passes the more likely it is that something will go wrong.
Usually the GUI is the missing link to make a lot of what Bitcoin is capable of more accessible to average users.
Such a thing is not good, especially since we are often planning very long timelines for inheritance stuff. The criticism was already raised in that same thread.
And your response over there does not really work for inheritance. 3 months of key inactivity? I have not touched my cold storage in half a decade or more, I don't even know when I touched it actually it could be much longer than that.
Apologies if it is already mentioned, but what's the problem with the following inheritance plan?
Alice want her son, Bob, to inherit her bitcoin when she passes away. She creates him a bitcoin wallet and signs a transaction transferring many of her coins to one of his addresses, while choosing a locktime far into the future. She hands him over the seed phrase of the new wallet and the transaction in raw file and in physical format (QR).
If she hasn't passed away before that time, she can invalidate the transaction by spending the coins to herself, and redo the same process to recreate another transaction. If she has passed away, then her son can just broadcast the transaction.
What's the problem this way? Seems like the simplest option to my mind.