Selling Bitcoin public address and privatekey pairs

[ACCTseller]

/facepalm

[1714145927]

1714145927

[1714145927]

1714145927

[1714145927]

1714145927

[1714145927]

1714145927

[1714145927]

1714145927

[1714145927]

1714145927

[coinmaster222]

Hey, reviving old topic...I know. The value in this is that someone like me that's creating a table of key pairs that are sorted by public address, with enough, can derive patterns of offset that the private keys are, assuming they wrap around. 


On the subject of RSA's:

To encrypt a number you multiply it by itself pub times, making sure to wrap around when you hit the maximum. To decrypt a message, you multiply it by itself priv times and you get back to the original number. It sounds surprising, but it actually works. This property was a big breakthrough when it was discovered.

Source: https://blog.cloudflare.com/a-relatively-easy-to-understand-primer-on-elliptic-curve-cryptography/ 

Eventually there will be a breakthrough when it comes to priv, pub keypairs with bitcoin. This idea can be used as a bitcoin recovery business for what was once forever lost bitcoins. This will also mean bitcoin will be broken unless it adapts. I for one would love to create this recovery service for the bitcoin community. If I get close to the breakthrough, I'll be sure to quitly tell whichever devs are working on the main bitcoin development. What good would it be to crash the price of bitcoin to nothing and hold all the coins, but there's value in being the first to make it to recover any current lost coins to re-enter into circulation (a recovery miner), and any new wallets of course would be migrated into newer wallet formats as long as the owner is still alive, thus revealing lost coins.

This is mathematically nonsense. EC is NOT RSA. The concept is faulty since EC point addition does not work in this way.

Its not Mathematical nonsense but complete rubbish. THE EC IS NOT THE RSA

[hexafraction]

Its not Mathematical nonsense but complete rubbish. THE EC IS NOT THE RSA

What's the difference? It's just invalid reasoning.

[coinmaster222]

Its not Mathematical nonsense but complete rubbish. THE EC IS NOT THE RSA

What's the difference? It's just invalid reasoning.

lol I was just taking it a step down from nonsense to complete rubbish

[tres_commas]

The point is not to use the same thing as RSA, but that there is a pattern that once was not known and when it was discovered it was a big break through. It's math, there's a pattern, I guarantee it, especially since there is a finite number of combinations, making it a rational namespace not an irrational one like the number pi.

[hexafraction]

The point is not to use the same thing as RSA, but that there is a pattern that once was not known and when it was discovered it was a big break through. It's math, there's a pattern, I guarantee it, especially since there is a finite number of combinations, making it a rational namespace not an irrational one like the number pi.

I'm sorry to tell you this, but you're spewing nonsense. "rational namespace"? The coordinates of points are fricking modular groups. There aren't non-integer rationals here. They're INTEGERS.

Assumption that a finite field has a pattern just because? Yes, of course there is a pattern, but if you try to find it, you're going to have to try every private key anyway.

What formal mathematical or cryptographic education do you have? Or are you just spewing unfounded crap?