If anything, this showcases the power of a proper password, and Truecrypt can use a cascaded algorithm setup, which means a proper password is just a nightmare to crack. Even if SHA256 got cracked somehow, there would be more to do ahead. Also, Truecrypt was replaced by Veracrypt and is no longer considered safe, so that to me is interesting that people still use TC containers.
As far as the password for the wallet.dat, im assuming that this guy has a known wallet.dat password, otherwise, whoever cracked the wallet.dat, would just take the funds isn't it? or he is naive enough to think that they would crack it, then ask for permission to take the funds? im assuming that's not the case here.
As far as the password for the wallet.dat, im assuming that this guy has a known wallet.dat password, otherwise, whoever cracked the wallet.dat, would just take the funds isn't it? or he is naive enough to think that they would crack it, then ask for permission to take the funds? im assuming that's not the case here.
Yes, I remember vaguely that Truecrypt offered such an option of cascaded hash algorithms, which means that you need to know this setup detail for a crack attack, too. It would slow down the process somewhat significantly, especially if you had to try different possibilities in this area, too. Sounds more and more like real pain in the ass.
I wouldn't waste my time and energy with such few hints in this particular case. No one knows if the OP keeps his word and especially if the wallet.dat actually has at least the private key for the mentioned publich address. Too many IFs...
...
wallet.dats for sale are very very likely 100% scams. You can wrap a pile of poop in fancy paper, it's still just poop.
