⭐ Merited by vincetcm (1)
Isn't it more efficient to search less pub keys over more steps? In other words, doesn't the process to convert the pub key to a comparable value take longer than it takes to generate the next baby step? I limited my search to 1000 keys based on this thought.
What is the fastest way to search multiple pubkeys? bsgs or kangaroo?? How many pubkeys can I search at one time?
Tried up to 160,000 pubs on keyhunt BSGS before.
How many private keys did you find successfully?
Zero, Null, Zilch, None, Nil
Welcome to Bitcoin.
I think it’s 6 one way, half a dozen the other.What is the fastest way to search multiple pubkeys? bsgs or kangaroo?? How many pubkeys can I search at one time?
Tried up to 160,000 pubs on keyhunt BSGS before.
How many private keys did you find successfully?
Zero, Null, Zilch, None, Nil
Welcome to Bitcoin.
Running one pub key gets you X speed. Running multiple pub keys at once gets you X/# of pubkeys speed.
Ultimately, #125 is too large of a range, whether you run 1 pub or 1000 pubs. But it can help you narrow down ranges IMO
Problem with running multiple pubs instead of only the puzzle pub, is that you can't (or should not) look for any range less than 2^240 .. because you know that these pubs are randomly generated and not masked with leading zeros. That's why it would be effective enough ( and more feasible) to only search for a puzzle pub key in its range.