 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
Hello.
Friends, I have a question.
I can put many public keys (to study, myself) in the kangaroo input file, for example about 1000.
Will this make the job more difficult? because, for example, if you find a possible collision of one of them, the others will no longer be searched and you are left with only one? (the possible found). Or it carries a set of possible collisions, independently for each of the public keys put in the input.
Thank you for the help that you may be able to provide
|
|
|
|
Is there more than one "process" to generate the hash and why can it be different?
There is only one process to generate a hash, however there are many ways to generate an address. I understand and I consider the hash of the address number 1 as "main"
I ask, because I am considering using Altcrack
Assuming you are not one of those guys wasting your time checking all private keys, when you want to "recover" something you should already have your address or at the very least have an idea about its type. For example an old wallet created in 2016 would be P2PKH using compressed public key. How can you think? no way  Ok, thank you both very much for the answers |
|
|
|
Hi everyone. Friends, I want to understand why the following happens. with the private key "4efa6c238595b26de667cc9ba23beed9906d4a9a319e93578fd85994f4169bf7" I get 5 addresses: 1. 1L5Ey3hpFzQqcEugomCSaPFH8ca9N2W2RN 2. 1HXaZVhSNH79X59e1oVWSsz1rrVP4YYKon 3. 32BJnWpLNKAEGFLPvut8GLNNSGYryiAxzU 4. bc1qk49grr4ezfacr9xduav9777t885l4qm4gl9w99 5. bc1q3pq88knxfufvhwk3zls6feupq70r0ud4yesha25qtcj6v9na6rmssyrwku If I try the first 3 of those addresses, in the link https://blockchain.info/es/addresstohash/XXX to obtain the hash, I get 3 different hashes. 1. d137b65522710266fcc2cd8f0c8daf6b963fb72b 2. b54a818eb9127b8194cde7585f7bcb39e9fa8375 3. 0559b8e6183c729d2b9a1d74b4ac46b3dafd54b2 why does that happen? Is there more than one "process" to generate the hash and why can it be different? I understand and I consider the hash of the address number 1 as "main" but I am left wondering if, perhaps, with another private, it can have the hash 2 and with another private, it can have the hash 3, and these , in turn, you can access these 5 addresses in this example. I ask, because I am considering using Altcrack and so I don't know if appending options 2 and 3 to the "wanted" list will work. Thanks in what can help me |
|
|
|
Friends, one question, does the Vanity run faster on linux or on Windows?
I currently use it on Windows and I am wondering if it is worth using it on Linux.
Thanks in what can help me
i repeat this question, please help me. Thanks, from my experience there is no big difference, so you can use both OS. Thanks for your reply.  Then I will not complicate and I will continue in w10 |
|
|
|
0368c52337698581d2509522b7e0cbeb500bb613b6ad0c27cda7e86988c796ee90
Keyrange 2: 1000000000000000000000000000
With who will find a private key we share 1.2 btc 50/50%
Find a privkey and post privkey in this thread.
ASAP privkey needed !!!
Regard
WonderPhilosofer, try find this puzzle ? We share 1.2 btc 50/50 ? You have so many keyrate power, help solve the this please
Hello, I have only recently understood all this (VS, BitCrack and now this kangaroo) I understand that this is the compressed pubKey, but it gives me another address (different from the one that starts with 17) and that confuses me a bit. Can you help me understand what the correct inputs should be in the kangaroo? Something like " 124bff742a76f92fa3a76f8f6552f 1FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF 0213ee32399b1441d0c8cf7caf6d10641b30d280fe1b59fcaa09eb0326cad5cb6f " If I put it to work, would I get a key that I can directly use, or would I get a key that I have to "Share" with someone to finish "finishing" the job? I sent you a message a couple of days ago. Thanks |
|
|
|
Friends, one question, does the Vanity run faster on linux or on Windows?
I currently use it on Windows and I am wondering if it is worth using it on Linux.
Thanks in what can help me
i repeat this question, please help me. Thanks, |
|
|
|
|
Friends, one question, does the Vanity run faster on linux or on Windows?
I currently use it on Windows and I am wondering if it is worth using it on Linux.
Thanks in what can help me
|
|
|
|
|
Hi guys, me again
Guys, even though I was able to compile BitCrack, using Cuda 11.2, I can't get it to work for me, because if I put more than 16 addresses, it tells me "Invalid Argument",
Has someone happened and corrected it?
Thanks in what can help me
|
|
|
|
is your card an LHR model/version?
Yes, I just saw that.   But I understand that all of the 30 series are. |
|
|
|
Ok, I have done a couple of tests (repeated so as not to be left with a single result and but with it I can average) I reduced the list of prefixes to 59 (before they were more than a million) and also shortened the prefixes, to 7 letters (before they were 9 letters) and with this if I can get results only with the GPU and i test it only, for 10 minutes the query was this: (Without CPU) vanitysearch.exe -b -gpu -t 0 -o results2.txt -g 2424,128 -i testShort.txt and the results were: 65 with CPU, the query was: vanitysearch.exe -b -gpu -t 8 -o results2.txt -g 2424,128 -i testShort.txt and the results were: 126 I do not know what to think, Perhaps as you said, it is not yet well Optimized for generation 30 cards and therefore, it "depends" a lot on the cpu for a long list and / or Long prefixes. Either that or your grid size is crazy. Normally it's like 128,256 or 256,512 where the y is normally larger or double the x. you have 2424,128; I've never seen those kind of settings before. It is the one that, doing many tests, gave me the best results, it is very near to half the cores that the card has. although, I don't trust that much anymore.
|
|
|
|
Ok, I have done a couple of tests (repeated so as not to be left with a single result and but with it I can average) I reduced the list of prefixes to 59 (before they were more than a million) and also shortened the prefixes, to 7 letters (before they were 9 letters) and with this if I can get results only with the GPU and i test it only, for 10 minutes the query was this: (Without CPU) vanitysearch.exe -b -gpu -t 0 -o results2.txt -g 2424,128 -i testShort.txt and the results were: 65 with CPU, the query was: vanitysearch.exe -b -gpu -t 8 -o results2.txt -g 2424,128 -i testShort.txt and the results were: 126 I do not know what to think, Perhaps as you said, it is not yet well Optimized for generation 30 cards and therefore, it "depends" a lot on the cpu for a long list and / or Long prefixes. |
|
|
|
Thanks for helping @WanderingPhilospher I relate the data: with CPU and GPU vanitysearch.exe -b -gpu -t 8 -o results.txt -g 2424,128 -i input.txt
Ignoring prefix "33ETnbLHH" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "34X4htRFX" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3C8jo9mjw" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3GwoqxGsY" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "38dz18J41" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3QWY3TyAs" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3KcxxV9z6" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3QdXcHSgH" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3KJgr9Eof" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
....
..........
..........
............
..............
[Building lookup16 100.0%]
[Building lookup32 100.0%]
Search: 1100540 prefixes (Lookup size 62937) [Compressed or Uncompressed]
Start Fri Sep 17 12:03:01 2021
Base Key: E7F12B7FED9FBE430CA759D3004F54C6319EB8B7D28933B11CB2AF9F07762248
Number of CPU thread: 8
GPU: GPU #0 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (38x0 cores) Grid(2424x128)
[4.63 Mkey/s][GPU 0.00 Mkey/s][Total 2^23.18][Prob 0.0%][50% in 1.9d][Found 0]
Warning, -633598779 items lost
Hint: Search with less prefixes, less threads (-g) or increase maxFound (-m)
[611.66 Mkey/s][GPU 610.23 Mkey/s][Total 2^40.29][Prob 70.5%][80% in 00:10:02][Found 113]
and NOW, without CPU: (it is the same query, Except -t) vanitysearch.exe -b -gpu -t 0 -o results.txt -g 2424,128 -i input.txt
Ignoring prefix "33ETnbLHH" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "34X4htRFX" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3C8jo9mjw" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3GwoqxGsY" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "38dz18J41" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3QWY3TyAs" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3KcxxV9z6" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3QdXcHSgH" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
Ignoring prefix "3KJgr9Eof" (P2PKH, P2SH or BECH32 allowed at once)
....
..........
..........
............
..............
[Building lookup16 100.0%]
[Building lookup32 100.0%]
Search: 1100540 prefixes (Lookup size 62937) [Compressed or Uncompressed]
Start Fri Sep 17 13:08:00 2021
Base Key: 926BA4B1C940344A84ACE6BBEFA0CA0898D8A0A03CFC7BE172661EEDA509175
Number of CPU thread: 0
GPU: GPU #0 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (38x0 cores) Grid(2424x128)
[0.00 Mkey/s][GPU 0.00 Mkey/s][Total 2^-inf][Prob 0.0%][50% in infy][Found 0]
Warning, -633612519 items lost
Hint: Search with less prefixes, less threads (-g) or increase maxFound (-m)
[585.86 Mkey/s][GPU 585.86 Mkey/s][Total 2^40.11][Prob 66.0%][70% in 00:03:52][Found 0] I think it's weird, and that it should give "almost" the same results. |
|
|
|
|
Hello again guys
I leave a new question, please help me to understand.
I am trying multiple options when I launch the vanitysearch, and I realize that if I "execute" it with -t 0 (which is the same as using it without a processor, and therefore, it would only be with a video card) it does not find anything, even after 10 minutes
Testing with a list of 1,000,000 prefixes, each with a size of 9 letters.
on the contrary, if I try with -t 6, there if I find values. (an average of 1 every 10 seconds)
Could it be that in the end only my processor works and not the gpu?
Shouldn't I find something with GPU alone?
thanks
|
|
|
|
You can play around with the grid size to see if you can tweak out more MKey/s, but here's the deal, IMO, most of these programs were releases prior to 30xx cards so the programs probably do not best optimize the use of the cards GPU structure. I have only used one program that did and that was an OpenCL program versus Cuda.
thanks again friend. |
|
|
|
Does it even has a performance impact? Or why is it relevant? Or is it blocking you on using latest cards? Anyhow updating CUDA is not hard. In my OpenCL Fork I actually upgraded it to Cuda 11.3 before ripping out the cuda code. I think you only have to modify the BitCrack.props file to upgrade the cuda version. https://github.com/Uzlopak/BitCrackOpenCL/blob/master/BitCrack.propsfriend, thanks for replying. You saved me from giving up I had made changes to multiple files with the vxproj extension, which also contained the name or path to the Cuda version, but I had not edited that specific file (.props) and now that I did it, it worked. Thank you very much. |
|
|
|
Why does appear (38X0 cores) ?
help me please understand a little. The code was built before the new cards came out. If you want to adjust, go into GPUEngine.cu and change the code to this: sSMtoCores nGpuArchCoresPerSM[] = {
{0x20, 32}, // Fermi Generation (SM 2.0) GF100 class
{0x21, 48}, // Fermi Generation (SM 2.1) GF10x class
{0x30, 192},
{0x32, 192},
{0x35, 192},
{0x37, 192},
{0x50, 128},
{0x52, 128},
{0x53, 128},
{0x60, 64},
{0x61, 128},
{0x62, 128},
{0x70, 64},
{0x72, 64},
{0x75, 64},
{0x86, 128},
{-1, -1} };
The {0x86, 128}, part is what will update and show you the proper grid size for your newer graphics card. Ok, thank you very much for answering. With that, as I understand it, I will allow to show the correct number of cores, but then the current results, with the 3060 ti are less than the 2080, for example? or do I still need to correct something in it to get better results? Thanks again! |
|
|
|
Hi, friend @richieburns thanks for uploading the .exe file. Could you also publish the source code of that version of cuda 11.2? I mention this since the source code that you have published, I am seeing that it still associates with cuda 10.2 Thanks.... I take advantage and ask the rest of the community. is there any version of bitcrack, published the source code, that is under cuda 11.2 or 11.4? thanks very much |
|
|
|
Hi friends, I wish you a nice day I recently started testing vanitySearch, and I am realizing that the 3060 TI card is not getting enough values that I would unknowingly expect. I have seen, in this message ( https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5112311.msg57116410#msg57116410), that the 2080 TI reaches 2500 MK / s (approximately) and the 2080 super reaches 2000 MK / s. in my case, and testing the 3060 TI, it doesn't even reach 2000. because it can be? VanitySearch.exe -gpu -t 0 1testme1
VanitySearch v1.19
Difficulty: 51529903411245
Search: 1testme1 [Compressed]
Start Sun Sep 12 20:40:48 2021
Base Key: 2CAF27F4DBD746225EBC883505540087E7CF680E05B35CEF9253A6C1D4603E65
Number of CPU thread: 0
GPU: GPU # 0 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (38x0 cores) Grid (304x128)
[1791.73 Mkey / s] [GPU 1791.73 Mkey / s] [Total 2 ^ 33.36] [Prob 0.0%] [50% in 05:31:45] [Found 0] Why does appear (38X0 cores) ? help me please understand a little. Thank you |
|
|
|
|
