it does reveal some questionable thought processes and direction of the Trezor team. Isn't it simply about money? They thought they could get more users by adding AOPP, so they did it. Then they realized existing users won't like it, so they removed it again. Wait until they realize how much they can earn selling IP and address data to chain spying companies!I have a strange feeling that something has changed recently. Maybe some forces has started pushing, maybe some companies decided to change their profile. And then you see that Proton is not as anonymous as you expected and quietly changes it's privacy policy: https://techcrunch.com/2021/09/06/protonmail-logged-ip-address-of-french-activist-after-order-by-swiss-authorities/And then the same story with NordVPN which for years stated that they are zero logs company: First VPNlab.net is closed ( https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/unhappy-new-year-for-cybercriminals-vpnlabnet-goes-offline) and then: https://www.pcmag.com/news/nordvpn-actually-we-do-comply-with-law-enforcement-data-requestsAs NordVPN operates under the jurisdiction of Panama and will not comply with requests from foreign governments and law enforcement agencies. We are 100% committed to our zero-logs policy – we never log the activities of our users to ensure their ultimate privacy and security. becames: NordVPN operates under the jurisdiction of Panama and will only comply with requests from foreign governments and law enforcement agencies if these requests are delivered according to laws and regulations. We are 100% committed to our zero-logs policy – to ensure users’ ultimate privacy and security, we never log their activity unless ordered by a court in an appropriate, legal way. In other words - you build your brand and then you suddenly change your rules, do 180 turn. |
|
|
|
|
May I ask what did you user to write your code? I mean - which documentation, description of algorithm etc.?
|
|
|
|
|
If you want help, why do not you answer to questions? Why you do not say clearly what you have?
Do you have 44 characters, 51 or 52?
Do you have any characters which are not on this list: 123456789ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijkmnopqrstuvwxyz
Do you know address which should be created?
Do you remember the source of your private key, maybe program you used?
As it was said before - you have methods to decode key if it has length 44, you have tool to fix ‘modified’ WIF if it has 51 or 52 characters…
But we are guessing…
|
|
|
|
Hi all
My private key is changed 1 or 2 characters, and i compose about 100 lines on file txt, how can it be added automatically to know which key is correct instead of trying in turn.
Yo may use my WifSolver, option ROTATE: https://github.com/PawelGorny/WifSolverI think it does exactly what you need. Yes, and i want to ask for the private key starting with 7, will it be 51 or 52 characters
If it was 5... and you changed to 7... then it is uncompressed, 51 characters. Compressed characters has 52 and starts with L1/2/3/4/5 or Kw/x/y/z |
|
|
|
The first, an orange icon, Bitcoin Core (64 bit); the second, a green icon, Bitcoin Core (testnet, 64 bit).
Two different networks. Real one and test net, for playing with mining, protocols etc. |
|
|
|
This is expired certificate for Bpip website, but it can still be used if you click accept the risk and continue.
I think they use free Let's Encrypt, so it's easy to renew it.
Exactly. It only shows that they do not use autorenewal script, which is recommended for Let's Encrypt as their validity period is short. Maybe they should ask hosting company to enable it if they do not have enough privileges to do it. https://techmonger.github.io/49/certbot-auto-renew/ |
|
|
|
Using my program numbers look more optimistic: on vast.ai single rtx3090 costs 0.414, single rtx3080Ti costs 0.314. I think their performance is similar (maybe paying 25% less for 3080Ti makes sense, I do not know now). On rtx3090 I measured performance around 3450Mkeys. It gives 58^11/3450000000/3600s = 2011807 hours => $832 888 Anyway, the question is where to find - let's say - 6000 cards to solve it in +-2 weeks... |
|
|
|
1) He will punish and deprive him of the reward for that week, which will be a manifestation of rigidity and tyranny, like an evil big boss.
2) He will be flexible and add the past week to the member, possibly with compensation from the member in the form of additional posts. It would be generous of him and a sign of care for his members.
LOL That's a journalistic objectivity ;-) |
|
|
|
I try to find an easy/faster/efficient way to get what is the next valid WIF in this case finding the next 01 in the Encode byte, but seems that it require more operations that my current method, so i will pass that approach. PawGo if you know an easy way to calculate it please tell us.
Yes, I was interested in that subject. I based one of my algorithms on that, but at the end I concluded it is not 100% sure solution and abandoned that. https://github.com/PawelGorny/WifSolver/blob/master/src/main/java/com/pawelgorny/wifsolver/WorkerJump.java I have tried to calculate the step which would produce the correct checksum. The problem I found was that it works only for missing characters on very limited range (close to limit which changes stride, I do not remember exactly but I had good results for range 2-3 characters to the right of character which stops changing checksum). If I moved right, I was not able to find the stable jump. In my post https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5265788.msg54905327#msg54905327 I showed the example where I was able to find the proper jump, but then I realized that method is not 100% sure and I did not work on that anymore. |
|
|
|
If you really want to solve your problem, you must first have a proper tool. You must have kind of BitCrack which would calculate address based not on private key + stride, but on "extended" private key (key+checksum) + stride, then cut off checksum part and then check public key, address. I believe it is doable and I have planned to do something like that for a long time, but I never had a good motivation ;-) Maybe now I will start.
Done! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5382190.0https://github.com/PawelGorny/WifSolverCuda |
|
|
|
Hello It took me a long time to start, but I hope that now, after the first step it will be much easier. Motivated by topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5380095.msg58913560#msg58913560 I decided to start migrating my CPU WifSolver into GPU. And here it is: https://github.com/PawelGorny/WifSolverCudaI will not repeat description from ReadMe file because all the important information are there - and it is easier to update one place. Currently it covers only needs of the aforementioned topic (and similar). Yes, yes I know... It is a long way to Tipperary. Code maybe does not look beautiful, lot of libraries (anyway JLP rulez), but it WORKS! Probably some CUDA masters will know how to improve it - please let me know any of your ideas. I may also say that it was a painful journey in time for me, as I did not use c++ for years. But finally I am happy the first step is done. And - what is the most important - it is the solution for the cases which cannot be solved with BitCrack (stride collides with checksum). And it is slightly faster than BitCrack - at least for the cases I tested. As it is CUDA - sky is the limit if you know how to configure a given program for your card. TODO list is long, if you have any ideas, requests - let me know, here or on github. editv 0.3.1 I have added worker for compressed address and improved general performance. Now it is possible to work on WIFs with missing characters at the beginning (static checksum, param: -checksum) and in the middle (checksum changed by stride). It looks like my algorithm is almost twice as fast as BitCrack, at least for the cases where BitCrack could be used. (On my card I had 690MKeys on regular Bitcrack and 790MKeys on patched versions, my WifSolver produces 1300MKeys. For compressed WIFs where missing characters are in the middle and compression flag is impacted, speed is around 3600MKeys). editv 0.4.3 I have added a small helper - WIF decoder. Some minor changes in algorithm and program itself, performance improved, especially for compressed keys with missing characters in the middle (x3 faster now, 10.000 MKeys on my test machine, solving 19*6 missing characters in 1:10 min). Added Makefile for linux builds. |
|
|
|
|
The problem with middle part is that any change has impact on checksum and compression flag. And that's good! Try to increment 6 characters and see if they produce correct flag 01. It would give you a subset of correct possibilities (not 58^6).
PS: I work on migrating WifSolver to CUDA, early beta version will be available soon (today/tomorrow).
|
|
|
|
|
Are you able to find your transactions on sites like blockchair.com or blockchain.com, using transaction id or listing your address? Are the amounts correct?
Isn’t it issue with default units (mBTC)?
|
|
|
|
Może kurs się zmienił w międzyczasie i twoje zlecenie już nie jest "atrakcyjne". Sprobowalbym zlozyc ponownie z aktualnym kursem. Na marginesie, to wydaje mi sie ze nie mają zbyt dużej płynności, skoro przez 24h obrót wyniósł 190 USD  |
|
|
|
|
A to działa jak giełda czy jak kantor? W sensie czy to nie jest tak że składasz ofertę i (bo do tanga trzeba dwojga) komuś musi odpowiadać na tyle że dochodzi do transakcji?
Możesz anulować zlecenie? Złożyć dyspozycję z innym kursem?
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
