An atomic swap is not instant by design. Each side has to publish a transaction and wait for the other chain to confirm it, so the time it takes is set mostly by the block spacing of the two chains involved rather than by anything either party does.
The record stops at MakerPaymentSpendConfirmFailed. The taker's claim on the maker's coin was broadcast but not seen to confirm.
taker_swap:2050] !wait for maker payment spend confirmations: rpc_clients:119] Waited too long until 1767324971 for transaction to be confirmed 5 times
By this step both payments were on their chains and the price had been struck, so the trade counts toward the reference price. The claim can still be made for as long as the payment is unspent, and since the timelock has passed the payer can take it back as well, so whichever lands first settles it. Whether it was retried is a question for the chain rather than for this log.
The chain shows the maker's payment still sitting in its contract: neither claimed nor refunded. The maker had already collected the taker's payment by this step, so the taker paid and has not received the maker's coin. The secret is public, so the taker's claim can still be made; the timelock expired 2026-01-02 04:44:31 UTC, so the maker can take it back now. Checked 2026-11-06 04:45:43 UTC. It will be asked again.
Wondering whether this one is yours? SwapScope cannot tell you: the parties are salted hashes, so that nobody can test a key against this data, and that cuts both ways. Search this swap's uuid in your own wallet's swap history, or open the payment transaction above on a block explorer and see whether the address paying into it is one of yours.
0651b362efefe90cc2eb06168e861567a877e0db171541267b03941ca9dd03bc
Both payments are on their chains and locked to the same secret hash 3801c61c03f4ebbabc72530c1edfbcd08c93cf28, and a preimage hashing to it was published on chain when one side claimed.
- MakerPaymentSent · MakerPaymentReceived: 0651b362efefe90cc2eb06168e861567a877e0db171541267b03941ca9dd03bc
- MakerPaymentSpent: 0c0189b7feeef7b75adbbc19b6188a00eda094d25c366a4b85efc1ca834ba446
ff3ba4a624ce960572f6c4a20ff47d74170b776824d168537dc3a94c0ccee6ae
Both payments are on their chains and locked to the same secret hash 3801c61c03f4ebbabc72530c1edfbcd08c93cf28, and a preimage hashing to it was published on chain when one side claimed.
- TakerFeeSent · TakerFeeValidated: 5b9a6b76ed319cd7ffa9bf37aaf06b240ed104a6a98d79400e97c86a76f0eb79
- TakerPaymentSent · TakerPaymentReceived: ff3ba4a624ce960572f6c4a20ff47d74170b776824d168537dc3a94c0ccee6ae
- TakerPaymentSpent: 1ee99e67d9bb33fd6b0e957c9aa3466c4b7fbce412dacfd19cb89cf599090089
No flags are stored against this swap. Flags are written while a swap sits inside a live pricing window, so on an older swap their absence means it was never assessed rather than that it was assessed and found clean.
Reported by defistats-gleec.