CustodyStress
Archive › Passphrase unavailable
Part of the CustodyStress archive of observed Bitcoin custody incidents
CS-01413

A 2025 recovery case involved a Bitcoin Core wallet.dat file from 2015.

Survives
Case description
A 2025 recovery case involved a Bitcoin Core wallet.dat file from 2015. The holder had encrypted the wallet with a password they were confident they remembered, but every combination they tried was rejected. After engaging a recovery specialist, it was determined that the wallet had been created on a machine with a non-standard keyboard layout—Swedish—and the password had been typed using position-based muscle memory. The password the holder 'remembered' was in fact the sequence of keystrokes on a US ANSI keyboard; the actual characters stored in the wallet encryption were the characters from the Swedish layout for those same key positions. Once the keyboard mapping was identified, the correct password was derived immediately.
Custody context
Stress conditionPassphrase unavailable
Custody systemDesktop Software Wallet
OutcomeSurvives
DocumentationUnknown
Year observed2025
CountryInternational
Structural dependencies observed
Technical specialist required
Outcome interpretation
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Source
Privately Reported
Evidence type
News article
Related cases involving passphrase unavailable
217 cases involve passphrase unavailable 25 cases involve desktop software wallet View archive statistics →
This archive documents observed custody survivability failures. It does not attempt to document all Bitcoin losses or security incidents. Submit a case
← All cases
Framework references
Terms guide
Survives
Access remained possible under the reported conditions.
Constrained
Access remained possible, but only with delay, dependence, or significant difficulty.
Blocked
Access was not possible under the reported conditions.
Indeterminate
There was not enough information to determine the outcome.
Single-person knowledge
Recovery depended on information or capability held by one individual who was unavailable.
Institutional dependence
Recovery depended on a third-party institution or service that was inaccessible or uncooperative.
Documentation gap
Recovery depended on instructions that were missing, incomplete, or unclear.
Authority mismatch
The person with legal authority to act did not have operational access, or vice versa.