Search content
Sort by
Showing 14 of 14 results by vhh
My use case - I've found a good amount of 13zb1hQbWV prefix matches for puzzle 66 so far. When I convert their hex key into their base10 decimal number, I notice many of them (about 1/3) have a factor of 13 and/or 17. An example is 3FEE2509944801483 (13zb1hQbWVECopz4XMEYH8e2t2gX4v4Us3) = (decimal) 73706563070708421763 = 7 × 13 × 809962231546246393.
Turns out that you were right, but it's just a lucky statistical guess in my opinion.
Priv key for puzzle 66 : 0x2832ed74f2b5e35ee = 46346217550346335726 = 2 × 13 × 17 × 104855695815263203
Quote
why the sha256 hash of the public key and not simply publish the sha256 hash of the “PRIVATE” key instead? Sha256 is secure and there is no way backwards to get the private key. This would mean that everyone in here could only check afterwards whether the person knew the correct private key, i.e. only after the pubkey had been made public by a TX.
mainly because with SHA256(PubKey) you can derive and check the ripemd160 , while with SHA56(PrivKey) there is nothing you can do ( maybe to establish the authenticity after the balance has been cleared out, but that will serve no good)
Please advise me on which wallet to use where the facility to enable and disable RBF (Replace-By-Fee) is available. My fully synchronized Bitcoin Core wallet has become corrupted, and IDK, Why Electrum has removed the RBF option.
Electrum has removed the RBF option starting with version 4.4 . All transactions have now RBF enabled by default. You can check it here https://github.com/spesmilo/electrum/issues/8490
You can use Blue wallet to control the RBF option : https://bluewallet.io/
Who else cracked down out of laughing because digaran is talking and replying to himself with his accounts? 
Agree
⭐ Merited by WanderingPhilospher (1)
I finally have 2^30.75+ (1,806,000,000) wild kangaroo points stored (offsets of #130s public key). Now it's time to release the tame kangaroos. Hopefully within 2-3 months, I'll have a tame land on a wild trap.
I imagine I am behind the group that found #120 & #125, but maybe luck will be on my side.
Long journey ahead, let's go.
I imagine I am behind the group that found #120 & #125, but maybe luck will be on my side.
Long journey ahead, let's go.
May the force BTC with you
⭐ Merited by citb0in (1)
I think your comments/scripts confuse people more than helps them, IMO.
I thought everyone is a cryptography expert around here, or worked for more than 25 years on EC, if my methods confuses you is because you don't try working only with scalars to penetrate N the group order. If I explain everything step by step, where would be the fun in that? Have you shared anything you could discover by operating over scalars?Whatever method, equation you can use to get definitive results over scalars, applies to points as well. I have explained how to get meaningful results based on that before. To Alek on a few previous pages, regarding how to get target /1024 for sure.
Digaran, you're like a toddler when it comes to ECC. Without the proper knowledge about ECC, group fields, etc , you will always be mesmerized by every result you're getting when you perform some arithmetical operations on the curve.
Quote
..if my methods confuses you is because you don't try working only with scalars to penetrate N the group order
That is so stupid in so many ways. The order is a prime number and you are trying to find a divisor that is different from 1 and the number itself....I'm speechless!
Quote
Whatever method, equation you can use to get definitive results over scalars, applies to points as well.
Another stupidity. For example you can multiply 2 scalars over the group field but you cannot do that with 2 points.
It seems that posting whatever crosses your mind, it's your full time job! This wouldn't be a problem if you will present concrete examples from A to Z or if you will have a solid understanding about ECC. The problem is that you're lacking both. There are tons of materials about ECC and how it works - you just have to google it. The more you'll learn, the more you'll realize what a masterpiece the secp256k1 is. "Penetrate N the group order" by using a combination of subtractions and divisions is at least pointless!
Something interesting is the fact about dividing a key, has anyone managed to divide 1 through 15 by different divisor to see the left most characters of resulting scalar? Yeah do that and you will realize the starting hex chars of your result depends on the ending chars of your target.
These are natural behaviors when you're working on a curve over a finite field. You need to study them more (properties of curves over prime fields, pairings, embedding degree, etc) in order to avoid attributing a magical aura to every result that pops out.
Re: == Bitcoin challenge transaction: ~1000 BTC total bounty to solvers! ==UPDATED==
Trojans and viruses in PuzzleBTC,
.I'm still amazed about your tactic, "free application"? What, is there any application for brute forcing bitcoin keys which is not free and some idiots would pay to use it, that we didn't know of?
No? then STFU, parasite!
Take a deep breath man and relax ! There is no need to call somebody parasite even if it's clearly a scammer! Don't forget, this is a community, I don't see the point of being toxic in your comments!
I'm developing brute force software following a slightly more coherent logic, I'll post the code soon.
support the project:
1JamesJ2H2myei94NswaBATqEsBhATENSU
support the project:
1JamesJ2H2myei94NswaBATqEsBhATENSU
Sorry but when you put "brute force" and "coherent logic" in the same sentence , the result will be "incoherent". Brute force is the lack of a algorithm that has a logic; if there is one, then the logic part comes in. For #66 there is no other way of cracking it apart from brute force ! Any reduction technique that you think it will work, it won't, because all we have is the output of RIPEMD160(SHA256(Public Key)). Unless you broke SHA256 and RIPEMD160 all together and somehow managed to recreate the 256 bits input from a 160 bits output, then this is pointless. As you could see from other posts, people have tried already all sorts of techniques : statistical analysis regarding keys distribution in a certain range, "magic" relationships between wallet keys (with or without the knowledge of Pub Key), etc.
Try to read more about address generation process. One you've done, move on to the signature generation part where you can read about other interesting potential vulnerabilities like nonce reuse , nonce share , lattices and so on ! You will see how interesting the secp256k1 curve really is !
Cheers!
Puzzle 129, 134, 139, 144, 149, 154, 160 are already solved, this means that this puzzle is rigged, but anyway, is it harder to solve puzzle 66 than mining a block?
Why on earth you said that above puzzles are already solved, however they aren't? We've been trying to solve a single puzzle 124 for past 8 months are so and now you suddenly claimed that all puzzles with pubkeys are solved. Are you checking their balances on Ethereum or some other cheap drug Blockchain?
Just look the hashs on blockchain, all mentioned hashs already have outs, how could a hash with unknown privatekey has outs?
Did you at least bother to use the search function in this thread to read why there are outs in those transactions?
guys, we don't talk about knowing the first bit, but finding it using an algorithm. It's pointless to spit out a public key when you know the private key that generates it. Take the pub key of puzzle #120 and post the first bit (discard the 0s , of course). If you manage to find that bit you can extend the algo to find out all the other remaining bits. 
There is even a way to find out the range in which the key is located, ...
Really? So tell us what the range is where #66 is lying
Not to be a smart pants, but the question is silly and the answer will follow the question : #66 lies somewhere between 0x20000000000000000 and 0x3ffffffffffffffff .
If you can determine the range of the private key from it's public key, ECC is broken. So, I don't believe that, yet.
Exactly, to determine the range, it mean determine one single bit position and that with the correct math operations can solve any key, so it is hard to believe
Totally agree with GoldTiger69 and albert0bsd here! One single bit position will break ECC!
Here is a pubkey 03995B8A5AD00A205BFB9837014E2978273B816CFB29CA9644AB6D44977C006C64
The first bit of the private key is 1
I will even give you range 2^144-2^145
Come on break the ECC with that bit.....
Sure : follow the same logic / algorithm that you applied when you discovered that the first bit is 1.
Nobody poses such an algorithm as we speak, modular math forbids it.
There is even a way to find out the range in which the key is located, ...
Really? So tell us what the range is where #66 is lying
Not to be a smart pants, but the question is silly and the answer will follow the question : #66 lies somewhere between 0x20000000000000000 and 0x3ffffffffffffffff .
If you can determine the range of the private key from it's public key, ECC is broken. So, I don't believe that, yet.
Exactly, to determine the range, it mean determine one single bit position and that with the correct math operations can solve any key, so it is hard to believe
Totally agree with GoldTiger69 and albert0bsd here! One single bit position will break ECC!
If I understand correctly from the answers on github, the creator does not want to change his code.
Well, the code is working as it should, so why should he change it? It finds the priv key from multiple signatures, when the some LSB or MSB of each signature nonce is leaked.