Quote from: mahmood1356 on June 11, 2025, 04:15:15 PM

Quote from: zion3301 on June 11, 2025, 03:12:29 PM

Quote from: kTimesG on June 10, 2025, 10:16:38 PM

The main idea is that computing public keys as fast as possible is even faster if they're not moving around blindly, like what happens in Kangaroo. But no one tried to use this effectively. I think this is because on a CPU there's basically zero performance difference, but on a GPU... the speed rockets (not that it wasn't already freaking fast) because the unknown dynamics disappear. Hence, a speed 3 to 4 times higher.

Very nice! I think the biggest bottleneck in computing public keys or (better said) in adding two public keys, which we usually only need, is the modular multiplicative inverse. If we find some low level optimizations, that can speed up the computation as well very much.

In the addition of two public keys (or two points on an elliptic curve), modular multiplicative inversion is the heaviest step.

By implementing fast inversion algorithms (such as Montgomery), using coordinate systems that eliminate or minimize inversion (such as projective or Jacobian), or employing batch inversion techniques, the computation speed can be dramatically increased.

Another approach is batch inversion: if multiple inversions are required, they can all be obtained with a single division and a few simple multiplications, resulting in a lower overall cost.

Quote from: Frequence on June 08, 2025, 10:33:23 PM

Let’s bring this thread back to life. I want to share something it might be helpful, or it might not but hopefully someone will find the key. Don’t forget to drop a tip if you do.

I’ve studied this puzzle for years, but with the recent surge in interest, it’s become more intriguing.

To save you time, here’s the basic rule I’m working with:

A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, D = 4, E = 5, F = 6, and 0 = F
The letter S stands for "reverse" or "swap".

I started analyzing the keys to find potential patterns. Before diving too deep, I focused on predicting what the key might start with.

I filtered all key ranges (screenshot: https://prnt.sc/T28HD6H65QAZ) and pulled out the first digits. Here’s what I found:

Code:

7
4
4
6
5
5
6
7
4
4
6
6
7
6
7
7
7
Y
4

You’ll notice that two digits repeat frequently.

I used the following prompt with multiple AI tools to analyze this:

Quote

Given a numerical sequence with missing values represented by X or Y, analyze the sequence using a sliding window approach (groups of 3). Look for repeated trios, rising or falling trends, plateaus, or cycles. Compare the numbers before and after missing variables with similar known patterns. Use logic to infer consistent values.

To test it, I masked a known value as X and asked the AI to predict it. It consistently predicted X correctly. For Y, the AI always returned Y = 4, regardless of the user or session.

You can try this yourself and you’ll likely get the same: Y = 4.

Assuming Y = 4, I went further and analyzed the first four characters from this list:
Screenshot: https://prnt.sc/rWWTgdLjXsAU

I noticed something interesting when comparing keys that start with 6 versus those starting with 4:

Code:

Original:
68F3
6AC3
6BD3
6CD6
6ABE
60F4

Modified:
4AED
4B5F
4C5C

As shown in the screenshot, I swapped the starting digit from 6 to 4 to observe the pattern. When applying some of the known parameters, certain keys started generating results. This suggests that modifying just the first four digits can have an impact so rather than brute-forcing blindly, it's more efficient to target these specific prefixes.

It’s odd that just a +1 or -1 change can yield another viable prefix.

I’m currently low on budget, but I plan to explore this more deeply. The way 69 was solved still feels suspicious to me, but I haven’t had time to fully investigate.

So far, I’ve focused on patterns like 4BC or 4AD. Remember the character values: A = 1, B = 2, ..., F = 6. This means possibilities like 4B3 or 4A4 are worth considering.

Don’t take any of this as gospel but if you're going to brute force, it’s smarter to narrow the search space and look for logical patterns instead of going in blind.

Keep in mind, this puzzle was created back in 2015, when Bitcoin was priced around $200 to $300.

Some people assume that because the current balance is high, the key must be near the end of the range. But remember the key for 69 was found near the beginning. So don’t be misled by the high balance into thinking it has to be at the end.

This is just my personal view, but I believe the key lies within the first 25% of the range. There had to be some kind of reset.

Hopefully, someone finds the key.

BTC: 123456789432PgWu32w4fUA8qvL4WxRvHj

Best of luck,
Regards

In my opinion, these puzzles were all manually created by their designer and are not derived from a deterministic wallet. This is because there are no visible patterns in these addresses that are typically found in deterministic wallets. I believe that understanding psychology is more important than cryptography in this case. We need to analyze the personal and individual characteristics of the puzzle creator to determine what pattern might have been in their mind when they designed the puzzles.