A person who loses a deposit note can recover the funds only if the note or its secret components still exist somewhere; the blockchain stores a commitment, not the note itself. This guide, Tornadocash, separates genuine recovery paths from dead ends and explains why Nova follows a different model.
The deposit note is the recovery key, not a password
The deposit note contains the secret information needed to prove ownership of an unspent deposit. It is not an account login, and the protocol does not keep a conventional password-recovery database.
The protocol documentation states: “This private note works as a private key for the user to access those funds later.” A private note is therefore best treated like a private key: whoever has it may be able to withdraw the associated funds, while someone without it cannot simply prove that the deposit belongs to them.
The contract does retain a public commitment in its Merkle tree, but that commitment is a one-way representation of the secret. A blockchain explorer can confirm that a deposit happened; it cannot reconstruct the missing note from the transaction.
Three places are worth checking before calling the funds lost
Recovery is possible only when an existing copy of the secret can be found.
- The original download or backup. Search the device and backups used when the deposit was created. Look for the exported note, a password-manager entry, encrypted storage, or a deliberately saved text file. Do not paste the note into a website or send it to anyone.
- Browser data from the same session. If the interface generated or displayed the note locally, browser history, downloads, site storage, or a still-open session may contain useful evidence. This is not guaranteed: clearing data, changing browsers, or using private browsing can remove the only copy.
- The withdrawal record. If the deposit was already withdrawn, the note is no longer needed to recover those funds. A successful withdrawal transaction and its recipient address are the relevant records, although they do not restore an unspent note.
A transaction hash confirms the deposit but cannot replace the secret
A transaction hash is useful for identifying the pool, token, amount, and timing, but it is not a substitute for the note.
This is the most common dead end. The deposit transaction exposes the commitment and other public blockchain data. It does not expose the secret and nullifier used to generate a valid withdrawal proof. A zero-knowledge proof lets a user prove a statement without revealing the underlying information, which is precisely why public transaction data cannot be turned back into the missing secret.
Anyone promising to “decode” a note from only a transaction hash is asking for money, a wallet signature, or sensitive data without offering a protocol-level recovery method. None of those requests creates the missing witness.
The recovery answer changes when the deposit used Nova
Nova uses the wallet address as the access route, so a Nova user does not recover funds with a classic fixed-amount deposit note.
| Situation | What controls access | Practical recovery outlook |
|---|---|---|
| Classic deposit with saved note | The note’s secret | Recoverable if the note is intact |
| Classic deposit with only transaction hash | Missing secret | Not recoverable from chain data alone |
| Classic deposit with damaged or partial note | Complete secret and nullifier | Usually unusable unless the original can be restored |
| Nova funds | The registered wallet address | Use the appropriate wallet connection instead of a note |
The saved-note route fits classic-pool users who still control a backup. The address-based route fits Nova users. A person with only a classic deposit transaction and no intact note has evidence of ownership history, but not the cryptographic material required for withdrawal.