Bitcoin Recovery Dry Run

Dry Run Testing Before Recovery Is Needed

This memo is published by CustodyStress, an independent Bitcoin custody stress test that produces reference documents for individuals, families, and professionals.

The Simulation Gap

A bitcoin recovery dry run involves testing custody recovery procedures before actual recovery is needed. The holder or their designated successor attempts to restore wallet access using backup materials. The test occurs under controlled conditions to verify the recovery process works without risking live holdings.

People search for bitcoin recovery dry run when they want to verify their backup and recovery setup functions correctly. The search reflects awareness that untested procedures might fail when actually needed.

---

The Simulation Gap

Recovery dry runs simulate failure conditions while the holder remains available. The holder watches. They can answer questions. They can correct mistakes. They can provide missing information. This supportive environment differs fundamentally from actual recovery scenarios where the holder is unavailable.

Actual recovery occurs when the holder is dead, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to participate. No one can answer questions. No one can correct errors. No one can supply forgotten information. The recovery must succeed based solely on documented materials and the recoverer's interpretation.

This gap between simulated and actual conditions makes bitcoin recovery dry run results unreliable predictors. The dry run succeeds with holder support. Actual recovery must succeed without that support. The presence or absence of the holder changes fundamental success conditions.

A holder performs a bitcoin recovery dry run with their spouse. The spouse attempts recovery using the documented seed phrase. They get confused about which wallet software to use. The holder explains the correct software. The spouse completes the recovery successfully. The dry run succeeds. Years later, the holder dies. The spouse attempts actual recovery. The same confusion about wallet software occurs. The holder is not available to clarify. The spouse downloads wrong software. Recovery fails. The dry run predicted success. Actual conditions produced failure.

---

Documentation Completeness Assumptions

Recovery dry runs often reveal documentation gaps. The tester discovers missing information and asks the holder. The holder provides it verbally. The gap is noticed and filled during the test. This correction process makes dry runs valuable for finding documentation problems.

The value diminishes if the verbal corrections are not documented afterward. The dry run revealed gaps. The gaps were filled verbally but not in writing. The next attempt will encounter the same gaps. The dry run identified problems without fixing them permanently.

Bitcoin recovery dry run effectiveness depends on converting discovered gaps into documentation updates. Without this conversion, each dry run repeats the same discoveries. The testing creates awareness of problems but not solutions to those problems.

Someone performs a bitcoin recovery dry run. They discover their documentation does not specify the derivation path needed for recovery. They ask the holder. The holder tells them the path. Recovery completes. Neither party writes down the derivation path after the test. Months pass. Another dry run occurs with a different person. They encounter the same missing derivation path. The information exists only in the holder's memory. The bitcoin recovery dry run revealed the gap twice but the gap persists because revelation did not trigger documentation.

---

Software Version Assumptions

Recovery dry runs use current software versions. The test occurs today using software available today. Actual recovery might occur years from now using whatever software is available then. Software changes. Interfaces evolve. Recovery procedures that work with current software might fail with future software.

This time gap creates unpredictability. The dry run proves recovery works now. It provides no proof recovery will work in five years. Software compatibility is a moving target that dry runs cannot capture.

Bitcoin recovery dry run testing creates false confidence when it assumes software stability. The successful test used 2024 software. Recovery in 2030 will use 2030 software. The dry run tested past compatibility, not future compatibility.

A holder performs a bitcoin recovery dry run using their current wallet software version 3.2. Recovery works perfectly. The documentation describes procedures specific to version 3.2. Five years pass. The holder becomes incapacitated. The designated recoverer finds the documentation. They download the current wallet software version 5.0. The interface has completely changed. Menu items described in the documentation do not exist. The derivation process works differently. The documentation from the dry run is obsolete. The bitcoin recovery dry run proved compatibility with software that no longer exists.

---

Stress and Time Pressure Absence

Dry runs occur in calm conditions. The tester has time. They can pause. They can research. They can retry failed attempts without consequences. Real recovery often occurs under stress with time pressure and emotional burden.

Grief affects cognitive function. Someone recovering funds after a death is not thinking clearly. Legal deadlines create pressure. Market conditions might require fast action. The recoverer might be juggling multiple estate responsibilities simultaneously.

Bitcoin recovery dry run conditions do not replicate this stress. The calm testing environment produces success that stressful real conditions might prevent. The person who successfully recovers during a dry run might fail when attempting the same process while grieving and facing deadlines.

A spouse successfully completes a bitcoin recovery dry run. They took their time, carefully following each step over a relaxed afternoon. The holder dies unexpectedly years later. The spouse attempts recovery while devastated by grief. They are also handling funeral arrangements, managing estate paperwork, and dealing with family. They sit down to perform the recovery. The procedure that took one afternoon during the dry run now feels overwhelming. They make errors. They get frustrated. They postpone the recovery. Weeks pass. The bitcoin recovery dry run proved technical capability under ideal conditions. It did not prove capability under actual emotional and logistical stress.

---

Component Access Verification

Recovery dry runs test whether the recoverer can execute the technical procedure. They often do not test whether the recoverer can physically access all required components. During the dry run, the holder provides the seed phrase. In actual recovery, the recoverer must find it.

Finding custody components introduces new failure modes. The location might be forgotten. Access might require keys or combinations that are unknown. Physical locations might have changed. The dry run bypassed all these access challenges by having components ready.

Bitcoin recovery dry run testing that skips component discovery creates false confidence about recovery capability. The technical procedure works. The location discovery procedure was never tested. Both must succeed for actual recovery to work.

A holder performs a bitcoin recovery dry run by handing their seed phrase to their executor. The executor successfully restores the wallet. The test proves the executor can execute recovery given the seed phrase. Years later, the holder dies. The executor must now find the seed phrase. The documentation says it is in the home safe. The safe requires a combination. The combination is written in a notebook somewhere. The notebook location is unknown. The executor can perform recovery but cannot access the materials needed to begin. The bitcoin recovery dry run tested technical recovery while leaving location discovery untested.

---

Partial Recovery Testing

Some dry runs test only portions of the full recovery path. The tester practices entering the seed phrase into wallet software. They stop before actually accessing funds. This partial testing leaves critical steps unverified.

The untested steps might include transaction creation, fee calculation, address generation, or other operations needed after wallet restoration. The wallet loads successfully. Using it effectively requires additional knowledge that partial testing did not verify.

Bitcoin recovery dry run value depends on testing the complete recovery path from initial access through successful fund movement. Stopping partway creates unknown gaps. The tested portion works. The untested portion might fail.

Someone performs a bitcoin recovery dry run by restoring their wallet from seed phrase. They confirm the wallet loads and shows the correct balance. They consider the test complete. They never actually attempt to create and send a transaction. Years later, actual recovery occurs. The wallet restores fine. The recoverer then discovers they do not understand how to construct transactions using this wallet software. The balance is visible but cannot be moved. The bitcoin recovery dry run tested access but not use. The recovery failed at the untested step.

---

Multisignature Testing Complications

Multisignature arrangements require coordinating multiple parties. A dry run might test only the recoverer's portion. The other signature holders might not participate in testing. This leaves cross-party coordination untested.

Actual recovery requires all parties to coordinate under stress. Time zones differ. Communication channels might be unclear. The process for assembling signatures might be undocumented. The dry run tested individual capability without testing group coordination.

Bitcoin recovery dry run effectiveness for multisignature setups depends on full-party participation. Testing one signature holder's process in isolation provides limited confidence about actual multi-party recovery under stress.

A multisignature setup requires two of three signatures. A bitcoin recovery dry run tests whether the primary holder can generate their signature. The test succeeds. It does not test whether the other two signature holders can be contacted, whether they remember how to sign, or whether the signature assembly process works. Actual recovery requires the primary holder to be unavailable. The remaining signature holders must coordinate. They have never tested this coordination. One signature holder is traveling without reliable internet. Another has forgotten their signing procedure. The multisignature recovery fails despite the primary holder's successful dry run.

---

Hardware Aging Effects

Recovery dry runs use current hardware. Devices work today. Actual recovery might occur after years of storage. Batteries degrade. Flash memory corrupts. USB connectors oxidize. Hardware that works during testing might fail during actual recovery after years in storage.

This aging introduces uncertainty that dry runs cannot test. The dry run proves the device works now. It does not prove the device will work after years of dormancy. Storage conditions affect degradation rates unpredictably.

Bitcoin recovery dry run testing assumes hardware stability over time. This assumption fails when hardware degrades between testing and actual use. The successful test used functioning hardware. Actual recovery must use aged hardware.

A holder performs a bitcoin recovery dry run using a hardware wallet purchased two years prior. The device functions perfectly. The wallet is then stored in a safe. Eight years pass. The holder dies. The designated recoverer retrieves the hardware wallet. The battery has leaked. Corrosion has damaged internal components. The device will not power on. The bitcoin recovery dry run proved the device worked when tested. It did not prove the device would survive eight years of storage.

---

Knowledge Transfer Verification

Recovery dry runs test whether documented procedures work. They less effectively test whether the recoverer understands why the procedures work. Following instructions is different from understanding the process. Understanding matters when instructions are incomplete or conditions change.

A recoverer who understands the concepts can adapt when procedures do not exactly match reality. A recoverer who only follows instructions mechanically cannot adapt. The dry run might succeed through mechanical instruction following that fails when actual conditions require adaptation.

Bitcoin recovery dry run effectiveness depends partly on whether testing builds genuine understanding or only tests instruction-following capability. Understanding provides resilience against unexpected conditions. Mechanical following fails when conditions diverge from documentation.

A spouse successfully performs a bitcoin recovery dry run by following written instructions exactly. They do not understand Bitcoin wallets or seed phrases. They simply followed the steps. Actual recovery occurs years later. The wallet software has changed slightly. The instructions reference a menu item that has been renamed. The spouse does not understand what the menu item was supposed to do, only what it was called. They cannot find the equivalent in the new interface. The bitcoin recovery dry run tested instruction-following. It did not build understanding that would enable adaptation.

---

Test Frequency Decay

Recovery dry runs happen once. Then months or years pass. The knowledge gained during testing decays. The recoverer forgets details. Confidence fades. By the time actual recovery is needed, the dry run might be so distant that its lessons no longer apply.

Repeated testing maintains knowledge but creates its own problems. Each test reveals custody components. The recoverer gains more knowledge over time. This knowledge accumulation changes the security posture. What started as testing becomes regular exposure to custody details.

Bitcoin recovery dry run frequency creates a tradeoff. Test rarely and knowledge decays. Test frequently and security exposure increases. Neither extreme provides both maintained knowledge and maintained security.

A designated recoverer performs a bitcoin recovery dry run and successfully completes it. Seven years pass without additional testing. The holder dies. The recoverer attempts actual recovery. They remember having done this before but cannot recall the specific steps. They attempt to reconstruct the process from memory. They make errors. The seven-year gap between test and need allowed the procedural knowledge to fade. The bitcoin recovery dry run created temporary confidence that did not persist across the actual time scale between test and use.

---

Summary

Bitcoin recovery dry run testing reveals procedure gaps under simulated conditions that differ from actual stress conditions. Dry runs occur with holder support, current software, calm environment, ready access to components, and full testing time. Actual recovery occurs without holder input, with future software, under emotional stress, requiring component discovery, and facing time pressure.

Documentation gaps discovered during dry runs require conversion to written updates. Software compatibility changes over time. Stress and time pressure affect execution capability. Component access must be tested separately from technical procedures. Partial testing leaves critical steps unverified. Multisignature coordination requires full-party testing. Hardware ages between testing and use. Understanding matters more than instruction-following when conditions change. Test frequency creates tradeoffs between knowledge decay and security exposure.

Understanding bitcoin recovery dry run limitations means recognizing that successful testing provides evidence of capability under test conditions. It does not guarantee capability under actual recovery conditions that differ in fundamental ways from the testing environment.

---

System Context

Examining Bitcoin Custody Under Stress

Confirming Bitcoin Recovery Works

Test Seed Phrase Without Moving Bitcoin

← Return to CustodyStress