Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 22 results by elisacat
Re: ✅⚡⭐️Affordable HQ Design Services,Websites,ANNs,WPs, Banners,infographics..⭐️⚡✅
Do you have a behance or some page that i can see some of your work? im not able to see anything on bitcointalk all the images you posted shows an error proxy message. thanks
Looking to hire someone to help me with modifying Bitcrack
currently, it calculates a value incrementally starting from the end
Required change:
I want the calculation to happen simultaneously at two places in the sequence
e.g.
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000【000000】【00000001】
I want it to calculate incrementally the last 8 digits + at the same time start counting incrementally the 6 digits before the last 8 digits.
So basically two points of incremental additions in the sequence, independent of each other. Not sure if it's possible or not.
currently, it calculates a value incrementally starting from the end
Required change:
I want the calculation to happen simultaneously at two places in the sequence
e.g.
00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000【000000】【00000001】
I want it to calculate incrementally the last 8 digits + at the same time start counting incrementally the 6 digits before the last 8 digits.
So basically two points of incremental additions in the sequence, independent of each other. Not sure if it's possible or not.
may be this will help someone to solve P 64
Puzzle 67 can be solved: 1BY8GQbnueYofwSuFAT3USAhGjPrkxDdW9
I think the puzzle creator is trying to send us hints within the address
So, if by some chance i knew the first 2 characters for puzzle number 64 then it becomes a 50 bit password hash problem right? in which case it would take roughly 100 days to solve if i understood your formula correctly
I calculate 834 days:2^56 / 1000000000 / 86400 = 833.99
For each character you know, in your example, the first 2, so let's say the key is 81C3F8710B26AC39, and you know the first 2 characters are 81, then you would need to solve the last 14 characters which would be 2 ^56 (14 x 4)
[/quote]
Yes correct, I just recalculated and got the same now. cheers
for each range, do 2 to the power of the bit range. Example 2 ^64 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,616; now divide that by # of key/s. example; 2 ^ 64 / 1,000,000,000 (1 billion key/s) = 18,446,744,073 seconds = 307,445,734 minutes = 5,124,095 hours = 213,503 days = 584 years . I think that math is accurate. but basically 2^64 / 1000000000 / 86400 (seconds in a day) = 213,503 days / 365 (days in a year) = 584 years
So, if by some chance i knew the first 2 characters for puzzle number 64 then it becomes a 50 bit password hash problem right? in which case it would take roughly 100 days to solve if i understood your formula correctly
Look at it like this; starting 64 bit range in hex, is 8000000000000000 and the last is FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF; SO 8000000000000000 then 8000000000000001, then 8000000000000002, all the way to FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
ok got it. makes sense now. thanks
Just trying to do some math gymnastics to understand how the previous solutions worked (e.g. puzzle 53, 54, 55) using only bitcrack (not kanagaroo or other methods) and a fast gpu e.g. RTX 2080
(assuming 1 Billion keys generated per second)
Is my maths correct:
15 characters in 100,000 seconds (28 hours)
16 characters in 1,000,000 seconds (278 hours) 11 days
17 characters in 10,000,000 seconds (2777 hours) 115 days
Calculated by converting the hash to a long number (e.g. 15 characters = 15 digit long number) and dividing it by 1 Billion keys per second to see how long it would take to sequentially reach the final value.
However if the above is correct, then how come puzzle 64 hasn't been solved within 115 days? or faster assuming some users are using multi-gpu? i'm sure my calculation has gone wrong somewhere above but not sure how
for each range, do 2 to the power of the bit range. Example 2 ^64 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,616; now divide that by # of key/s. example; 2 ^ 64 / 1,000,000,000 (1 billion key/s) = 18,446,744,073 seconds = 307,445,734 minutes = 5,124,095 hours = 213,503 days = 584 years . I think that math is accurate. but basically 2^64 / 1000000000 / 86400 (seconds in a day) = 213,503 days / 365 (days in a year) = 584 years(assuming 1 Billion keys generated per second)
Is my maths correct:
15 characters in 100,000 seconds (28 hours)
16 characters in 1,000,000 seconds (278 hours) 11 days
17 characters in 10,000,000 seconds (2777 hours) 115 days
Calculated by converting the hash to a long number (e.g. 15 characters = 15 digit long number) and dividing it by 1 Billion keys per second to see how long it would take to sequentially reach the final value.
However if the above is correct, then how come puzzle 64 hasn't been solved within 115 days? or faster assuming some users are using multi-gpu? i'm sure my calculation has gone wrong somewhere above but not sure how
Thanks. But using the example of puzzle 64, most of the hex values are just zeroes so only 16 characters are used for calculation
so if i use your calculation:
2^16 / 1000000000 (per/second key rate of a fast bitcrack) /86400 would be the correct formula right? but that produces a number in the sub decimal i.e. hours in total to calculate puzzle 64
Just trying to do some math gymnastics to understand how the previous solutions worked (e.g. puzzle 53, 54, 55) using only bitcrack (not kanagaroo or other methods) and a fast gpu e.g. RTX 2080
(assuming 1 Billion keys generated per second)
Is my maths correct:
15 characters in 100,000 seconds (28 hours)
16 characters in 1,000,000 seconds (278 hours) 11 days
17 characters in 10,000,000 seconds (2777 hours) 115 days
Calculated by converting the hash to a long number (e.g. 15 characters = 15 digit long number) and dividing it by 1 Billion keys per second to see how long it would take to sequentially reach the final value.
However if the above is correct, then how come puzzle 64 hasn't been solved within 115 days? or faster assuming some users are using multi-gpu? i'm sure my calculation has gone wrong somewhere above but not sure how
(assuming 1 Billion keys generated per second)
Is my maths correct:
15 characters in 100,000 seconds (28 hours)
16 characters in 1,000,000 seconds (278 hours) 11 days
17 characters in 10,000,000 seconds (2777 hours) 115 days
Calculated by converting the hash to a long number (e.g. 15 characters = 15 digit long number) and dividing it by 1 Billion keys per second to see how long it would take to sequentially reach the final value.
However if the above is correct, then how come puzzle 64 hasn't been solved within 115 days? or faster assuming some users are using multi-gpu? i'm sure my calculation has gone wrong somewhere above but not sure how
Re: == Bitcoin challenge transaction: ~100 BTC total bounty to solvers! ==UPDATED==
How is it that more complex keys are discovered but simpler one like 64 have not? i would have thought the ones after 64 would be significantly more difficult/nearly impossible. Is there any reason why this is the case?
Every five txs the public key is exposed. Maybe someone find it with other approach.
There is no "approach". The whole point of creating original transaction is to prove it, and it has been proven solid for 6 years since then.
The "approach" that was mentioned is in the different program used. People have used the "Kangaroo" program to find the keys with known public keys; versus brute force approach for the smaller ranges, i.e. 64 bit range.
Just trying to do some math gymnastics to understand how the previous solutions worked (e.g. puzzle 53, 54, 55) using only bitcrack (not kanagaroo or other methods) and a fast gpu e.g. RTX 2080 (assuming 1 Billion keys generated per second)
Is my maths correct:
I've tried to do some basic maths but i could be wrong (bitcrack does 1 billion keys per second) so it would complete sequences of 14 characters in 10,000 seconds
15 characters in 100,000 seconds (28 hours)
16 characters in 1,000,000 seconds (278 hours) 11 days
17 characters in 10,000,000 seconds (2777 hours) 115 days
However if the above is correct, then how come puzzle 64 hasn't been solved within 115 days? or faster assuming some users are using multi-gpu? i'm sure my calculation has gone wrong somewhere above but not sure how
But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?
It would be a huge security risk to have it run sequentially. Imagine if I were to try to get bc1qw and since it runs sequentially, another person also gets the same bc1qw address. It has a RNG to ensure the randomness.Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?
Vanity gen brute forces using the given split public key. When it gets the correct solution, it'll produce your part public key and part private key. Give the private key combine with their part private key and the address will be as defined in the pattern.I see so it works differently from bitcrack then? because the biggest issue with bitcrack was the developer never wanted to add randomness so it would start at a specified sequence and work its way up +1, +1 etc etc
which never made sense to me because users with million + database would all be going through the same numbers so duplicated effort
if Vanitysearch really generates the sequences in calculation randomly that's a big advantage.
Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.
So it's up to people to tweak the code or use it in a way to not duplicate effort, like the pool at ttd...effort is not duplicated because users are assigned different ranges to work on.
Adding randomness, to start at a specified sequence...what does that mean? The point of randomness should or could mean not knowing what key the program starts with, or each thread generates/starts at random keys. I have modified a version of Bitcrack where each GPU thread generates a random key, and then starts searching sequentially from that key. And you can also tell the program to "regenerate" every x amount of keys searched.
Vanity generates the random base key, but then sequentially (and inverse) searches for xyz prefix. User can use the rekey function to generate a new random base key.
Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.
You pass the public key and a prefix through a vanity search program, and then that gives you one of the private keys needed. My understanding is that to combine two private keys, you first convert them into large numbers, and then compute something called a Lagrange interpolation polynomial (source) at 0. And this has parameters x and y which are contained inside each private key, and the x's I know are inputs to this polynomial because I read the code, and y's are solutions of a split-key equation that uses a different polynomial.
It's complicated math, and I'll have to go over it for a few days before I fully understand it.
Thanks, sounds complicated for sure
Re: == Bitcoin challenge transaction: ~100 BTC total bounty to solvers! ==UPDATED==
How is it that more complex keys are discovered but simpler one like 64 have not? i would have thought the ones after 64 would be significantly more difficult/nearly impossible. Is there any reason why this is the case?
But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?
It would be a huge security risk to have it run sequentially. Imagine if I were to try to get bc1qw and since it runs sequentially, another person also gets the same bc1qw address. It has a RNG to ensure the randomness.Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?
Vanity gen brute forces using the given split public key. When it gets the correct solution, it'll produce your part public key and part private key. Give the private key combine with their part private key and the address will be as defined in the pattern.I see so it works differently from bitcrack then? because the biggest issue with bitcrack was the developer never wanted to add randomness so it would start at a specified sequence and work its way up +1, +1 etc etc
which never made sense to me because users with million + database would all be going through the same numbers so duplicated effort
if Vanitysearch really generates the sequences in calculation randomly that's a big advantage.
Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.
Anyone want to work 1qwertyuiop with me for a month or so and profit split?
I'll be running 2x v100s to solve.
Reward is 1.2BTC
I'll be running 2x v100s to solve.
Reward is 1.2BTC
*I highly doubt there will be duplicates lol - odds are almost 0
R S Z is dead in the water. It only works on P2KH addresses (i.e. most addresses that begin with '1') and practically the moment this was discovered it has been wiped clean. Tried it for all the lost addresses from 2010 to 2014 (120k total) and nothing. And as far as im aware it's not possible to calculate R S Z for P2SH addresses.
im making some modifications to bitcrack so that it can calculate random keys instead of incremental (i know the developer said he didn't see the point of random but it doesn't make sense if nearly everyone is using bitcrack the same way and generating the same results, everyone would just be following each others footsteps - randomization i think solves some of that)
It would have two elements
1) Randomization based on number of characters e.g. 30 characters should be random (so last 30 digits are randomized)
0000000000000000000000000000000000 HHSJSHDJSHHDD773737HSHSSHHSSJD
0000000000000000000000000000000000 73737373SGHDDGSHSHGDHSGSHDGSHD
0000000000000000000000000000000000 HSHSSJJDD74377448788SSHSHSSHHD
2) Randomization for the remaining variables. E.g. user inputs FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED (bitcrack will generate random results for the remaining digits in the 64 key sequence)
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED JNMSXNMNBXBBDEHGHJMSDMS738738733837737337333
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED JJKSJSJDJKDKJJK73873378738KJSJSKJSKDKDKKDDKD
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED DHK477478484748747878487JKKJSJSSHJSHHDDKJDKD
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED GSGSG74747484848383739339HDHDHDHFJFFHFFJJFHF
Sorting this code in the backend is fine, only problem is i dont understand how the frontend works i.e. examples from the github:
--keyspace 80000000:ffffffff
or
--keyspace 766519C977831678F0000000000
these values above are less than 64 characters so how are they used in the examples in the github? does it mean that by entering above the software already knows it has to add zeros to the beginning to reach 64 characters?
It would have two elements
1) Randomization based on number of characters e.g. 30 characters should be random (so last 30 digits are randomized)
0000000000000000000000000000000000 HHSJSHDJSHHDD773737HSHSSHHSSJD
0000000000000000000000000000000000 73737373SGHDDGSHSHGDHSGSHDGSHD
0000000000000000000000000000000000 HSHSSJJDD74377448788SSHSHSSHHD
2) Randomization for the remaining variables. E.g. user inputs FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED (bitcrack will generate random results for the remaining digits in the 64 key sequence)
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED JNMSXNMNBXBBDEHGHJMSDMS738738733837737337333
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED JJKSJSJDJKDKJJK73873378738KJSJSKJSKDKDKKDDKD
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED DHK477478484748747878487JKKJSJSSHJSHHDDKJDKD
FFFFFFFFEDEFEDEDEFED GSGSG74747484848383739339HDHDHDHFJFFHFFJJFHF
Sorting this code in the backend is fine, only problem is i dont understand how the frontend works i.e. examples from the github:
--keyspace 80000000:ffffffff
or
--keyspace 766519C977831678F0000000000
these values above are less than 64 characters so how are they used in the examples in the github? does it mean that by entering above the software already knows it has to add zeros to the beginning to reach 64 characters?
is there any legitimate reason that someone would do this?
From the top of my head one such example could be deposit addresses at exchanges, especially for those using arbitrage bots.
The exchange uses the deposited funds for other customers' withdrawals, hence you'll see a big mix-up of transactions.
And in many cases the user has one and same deposit address, hence all his deposits will always go there. If he uses huge number of deposits for arbitrage, maybe you can get to see this.
⭐ Merited by ranochigo (2)
Curious about this, not sure if anyone has the answer
Some bitcoin addresses show literally thousands of transactions and almost every 2 days money shifting from one wallet to 100 wallets or more and then each wallet moves funds again and again.
Ive seen some addresses showing 20,000 + transactions
is there any legitimate reason that someone would do this? or are these just dodgy accounts?
always found it strange
Some bitcoin addresses show literally thousands of transactions and almost every 2 days money shifting from one wallet to 100 wallets or more and then each wallet moves funds again and again.
Ive seen some addresses showing 20,000 + transactions
is there any legitimate reason that someone would do this? or are these just dodgy accounts?
always found it strange
I might be able to put Bitcrack on your Vast.ai servers, send me a PM.
I've sent you a DM. thanks
Hey guys,
Can i hire anyone for $80 to help me with getting this easily loaded onto Vast.ai instances
Basically i want to try two things:
1) load a list of passwords and check it against another file containing addresses
2) Generate random public wallets and check them against a database for a match (which im guessing is what bitcrack does)?
Am i correct that since this uses CUDA it processes up to 1 million or more passwords per second?
I'm only trying this with abandoned wallets. I'm in serious debt in about a month and this is my last ditch effort (i know the odds)
Thank you
Can i hire anyone for $80 to help me with getting this easily loaded onto Vast.ai instances
Basically i want to try two things:
1) load a list of passwords and check it against another file containing addresses
2) Generate random public wallets and check them against a database for a match (which im guessing is what bitcrack does)?
Am i correct that since this uses CUDA it processes up to 1 million or more passwords per second?
I'm only trying this with abandoned wallets. I'm in serious debt in about a month and this is my last ditch effort (i know the odds)
Thank you