Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[racminer]

A screen shot is an actual  picture of your screen not the text that you put here (no offense !).
If you do not share at least the executable form of your program, it is hard to believe that with a few cpu cores you can beat  the 2080 gpu.
Again, I do not mean to offend you, but seeing is believing.

I bet a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can, with publicly available programs.

I hear you...however, it's fine, I do not have the energy to take an image and hunt somewhere to post it and then link to it LOL.

I know the program is real and works. I do not need others to believe or not believe.

This is a test program.  Will it currently help with the challenge, no, it is currently limited to 72 bits. But I am trying to get to a point where it can help with my plan.

Another point is for the people who have ideas and are always shot down by others on this forum that something "will not work" or "would take too long" etc. If you have an idea, work on it; if your initial idea wasn't great, maybe you will gain more knowledge along the initial journey. Shooters shoot!

Ok. I get it. Just keep talking to yourself here and elsewhere.

I gess all these years Jean Luc Pons (https://github.com/JeanLucPons ) was on the wrong track    

LOL...no JLP was never on a wrong track. He took existing theories/programs and made them better/the best.
I bet he would agree that, "a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can". 100% (If you disagree with that, I will challenge you to a "race".)
He took a lock step approach to the grand finale...his Kangaroo program.
However, just because someone else creates/makes something that may be faster, doesn't mean it can't be. I bet albertosd would tell you his BSGS program is faster than JLPs, I think he has a video on it, I think.

And your Vanbitcracken is faster than Bitcrack, that doesn't mean Bitcrack sux.

This guy is clearly toxic. Ignore him and keep up the great work.

Hhhh I am realistic not toxic Mr Evil !

[Evillo]

A screen shot is an actual  picture of your screen not the text that you put here (no offense !).
If you do not share at least the executable form of your program, it is hard to believe that with a few cpu cores you can beat  the 2080 gpu.
Again, I do not mean to offend you, but seeing is believing.

I bet a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can, with publicly available programs.

I hear you...however, it's fine, I do not have the energy to take an image and hunt somewhere to post it and then link to it LOL.

I know the program is real and works. I do not need others to believe or not believe.

This is a test program.  Will it currently help with the challenge, no, it is currently limited to 72 bits. But I am trying to get to a point where it can help with my plan.

Another point is for the people who have ideas and are always shot down by others on this forum that something "will not work" or "would take too long" etc. If you have an idea, work on it; if your initial idea wasn't great, maybe you will gain more knowledge along the initial journey. Shooters shoot!

Ok. I get it. Just keep talking to yourself here and elsewhere.

I gess all these years Jean Luc Pons (https://github.com/JeanLucPons ) was on the wrong track    

LOL...no JLP was never on a wrong track. He took existing theories/programs and made them better/the best.
I bet he would agree that, "a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can". 100% (If you disagree with that, I will challenge you to a "race".)
He took a lock step approach to the grand finale...his Kangaroo program.
However, just because someone else creates/makes something that may be faster, doesn't mean it can't be. I bet albertosd would tell you his BSGS program is faster than JLPs, I think he has a video on it, I think.

And your Vanbitcracken is faster than Bitcrack, that doesn't mean Bitcrack sux.

This guy is clearly toxic. Ignore him and keep up the great work.

Hhhh I am realistic not toxic Mr Evil !

But you're not though, if you are, you would have googled the guy and realized that he has a reliable repository on Github with at least two innovative programs for cracking puzzles. Next time try to combine skepticism with research 😉

[albert0bsd]

However, just because someone else creates/makes something that may be faster, doesn't mean it can't be. I bet albertosd would tell you his BSGS program is faster than JLPs, I think he has a video on it, I think.

Yes my version of BSGS is a little more faster because the bloom filter use less memory than the hash table.

This debate between GPU and CPU power need to be clarified.

Obviously GPU Power is better than CPU.

So to compare apples with apples, we need the exactly same program or algorithm to see how fast is one or another.

The main advantage of CPU programs that use RAM as "booster" is that RAM for CPU can reach some 128 GB or some terabyte if you are testing it in some custom server.

The GPU max Memory available is some 32 GB in some high end devices.

That is why there aren't many programs like BSGS for GPU.

So we can't compare an algorithm like kangaroo for GPU against some Custom BSGS with stride in CPU because in that case we are comparing apples and pineapples. (There is not point of comparation)

Regards

[WanderingPhilospher]

However, just because someone else creates/makes something that may be faster, doesn't mean it can't be. I bet albertosd would tell you his BSGS program is faster than JLPs, I think he has a video on it, I think.

Yes my version of BSGS is a little more faster because the bloom filter use less memory than the hash table.

This debate between GPU and CPU power need to be clarified.

Obviously GPU Power is better than CPU.

So to compare apples with apples, we need the exactly same program or algorithm to see how fast is one or another.

The main advantage of CPU programs that use RAM as "booster" is that RAM for CPU can reach some 128 GB or some terabyte if you are testing it in some custom server.

The GPU max Memory available is some 32 GB in some high end devices.

That is why there aren't many programs like BSGS for GPU.

So we can't compare an algorithm like kangaroo for GPU against some Custom BSGS with stride in CPU because in that case we are comparing apples and pineapples. (There is not point of comparation)

Regards

Agreed, we can compare JLPs public version of Kangaroo. CPU versus GPU, 500 - 1000 public keys.

[racminer]

A screen shot is an actual  picture of your screen not the text that you put here (no offense !).
If you do not share at least the executable form of your program, it is hard to believe that with a few cpu cores you can beat  the 2080 gpu.
Again, I do not mean to offend you, but seeing is believing.

I bet a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can, with publicly available programs.

I hear you...however, it's fine, I do not have the energy to take an image and hunt somewhere to post it and then link to it LOL.

I know the program is real and works. I do not need others to believe or not believe.

This is a test program.  Will it currently help with the challenge, no, it is currently limited to 72 bits. But I am trying to get to a point where it can help with my plan.

Another point is for the people who have ideas and are always shot down by others on this forum that something "will not work" or "would take too long" etc. If you have an idea, work on it; if your initial idea wasn't great, maybe you will gain more knowledge along the initial journey. Shooters shoot!

Ok. I get it. Just keep talking to yourself here and elsewhere.

I gess all these years Jean Luc Pons (https://github.com/JeanLucPons ) was on the wrong track    

LOL...no JLP was never on a wrong track. He took existing theories/programs and made them better/the best.
I bet he would agree that, "a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can". 100% (If you disagree with that, I will challenge you to a "race".)
He took a lock step approach to the grand finale...his Kangaroo program.
However, just because someone else creates/makes something that may be faster, doesn't mean it can't be. I bet albertosd would tell you his BSGS program is faster than JLPs, I think he has a video on it, I think.

And your Vanbitcracken is faster than Bitcrack, that doesn't mean Bitcrack sux.

This guy is clearly toxic. Ignore him and keep up the great work.

Hhhh I am realistic not toxic Mr Evil !

But you're not though, if you are, you would have googled the guy and realized that he has a reliable repository on Github with at least two innovative programs for cracking puzzles. Next time try to combine skepticism with research 😉

I've seen all repositories, compiled, tried and compared almost all of them.  Repositories where no  source code is provided do not contribute much to research.

 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1305887.0
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306983.0
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5166284

and for up to date information, look here  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5218972.0 posted by Zielar (Thank you very much Mr Zielar)
also look here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5244940.0 posted by Jean_Luc (Merci beaucoup Monsieur Jean Luc Pons)

All of you keep up with the good work.

   

[Easteregg69]

Stop stealing from people who don't deserve it. It's not a nut cracker job.

Anyways I crack the moaners. I have 2048 cuda cores up and running. gtx-980.

You want me to put that in to the graphics card.

I read this.

[Evillo]

A screen shot is an actual  picture of your screen not the text that you put here (no offense !).
If you do not share at least the executable form of your program, it is hard to believe that with a few cpu cores you can beat  the 2080 gpu.
Again, I do not mean to offend you, but seeing is believing.

I bet a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can, with publicly available programs.

I hear you...however, it's fine, I do not have the energy to take an image and hunt somewhere to post it and then link to it LOL.

I know the program is real and works. I do not need others to believe or not believe.

This is a test program.  Will it currently help with the challenge, no, it is currently limited to 72 bits. But I am trying to get to a point where it can help with my plan.

Another point is for the people who have ideas and are always shot down by others on this forum that something "will not work" or "would take too long" etc. If you have an idea, work on it; if your initial idea wasn't great, maybe you will gain more knowledge along the initial journey. Shooters shoot!

Ok. I get it. Just keep talking to yourself here and elsewhere.

I gess all these years Jean Luc Pons (https://github.com/JeanLucPons ) was on the wrong track    

LOL...no JLP was never on a wrong track. He took existing theories/programs and made them better/the best.
I bet he would agree that, "a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can". 100% (If you disagree with that, I will challenge you to a "race".)
He took a lock step approach to the grand finale...his Kangaroo program.
However, just because someone else creates/makes something that may be faster, doesn't mean it can't be. I bet albertosd would tell you his BSGS program is faster than JLPs, I think he has a video on it, I think.

And your Vanbitcracken is faster than Bitcrack, that doesn't mean Bitcrack sux.

This guy is clearly toxic. Ignore him and keep up the great work.

Hhhh I am realistic not toxic Mr Evil !

But you're not though, if you are, you would have googled the guy and realized that he has a reliable repository on Github with at least two innovative programs for cracking puzzles. Next time try to combine skepticism with research 😉

I've seen all repositories, compiled, tried and compared almost all of them.  Repositories where no  source code is provided do not contribute much to research.

 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1305887.0
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306983.0
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5166284

and for up to date information, look here  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5218972.0 posted by Zielar (Thank you very much Mr Zielar)
also look here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5244940.0 posted by Jean_Luc (Merci beaucoup Monsieur Jean Luc Pons)

All of you keep up with the good work.

  

Oh so now posting links to puzzle-related threads proves someone is a good researcher?! Wow. I learned something new today. Not!

I dunno what's your problem with compiled code. Millions of Windows users must be inferior to you then.

[racminer]

A screen shot is an actual  picture of your screen not the text that you put here (no offense !).
If you do not share at least the executable form of your program, it is hard to believe that with a few cpu cores you can beat  the 2080 gpu.
Again, I do not mean to offend you, but seeing is believing.

I bet a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can, with publicly available programs.

I hear you...however, it's fine, I do not have the energy to take an image and hunt somewhere to post it and then link to it LOL.

I know the program is real and works. I do not need others to believe or not believe.

This is a test program.  Will it currently help with the challenge, no, it is currently limited to 72 bits. But I am trying to get to a point where it can help with my plan.

Another point is for the people who have ideas and are always shot down by others on this forum that something "will not work" or "would take too long" etc. If you have an idea, work on it; if your initial idea wasn't great, maybe you will gain more knowledge along the initial journey. Shooters shoot!

Ok. I get it. Just keep talking to yourself here and elsewhere.

I gess all these years Jean Luc Pons (https://github.com/JeanLucPons ) was on the wrong track    

LOL...no JLP was never on a wrong track. He took existing theories/programs and made them better/the best.
I bet he would agree that, "a CPU can find 1,000 pub keys (up to say 48-52 bits) before any GPU can". 100% (If you disagree with that, I will challenge you to a "race".)
He took a lock step approach to the grand finale...his Kangaroo program.
However, just because someone else creates/makes something that may be faster, doesn't mean it can't be. I bet albertosd would tell you his BSGS program is faster than JLPs, I think he has a video on it, I think.

And your Vanbitcracken is faster than Bitcrack, that doesn't mean Bitcrack sux.

This guy is clearly toxic. Ignore him and keep up the great work.

Hhhh I am realistic not toxic Mr Evil !

But you're not though, if you are, you would have googled the guy and realized that he has a reliable repository on Github with at least two innovative programs for cracking puzzles. Next time try to combine skepticism with research 😉

I've seen all repositories, compiled, tried and compared almost all of them.  Repositories where no  source code is provided do not contribute much to research.

 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1305887.0
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306983.0
 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5166284

and for up to date information, look here  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5218972.0 posted by Zielar (Thank you very much Mr Zielar)
also look here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5244940.0 posted by Jean_Luc (Merci beaucoup Monsieur Jean Luc Pons)

All of you keep up with the good work.

  

Oh so now posting links to puzzle-related threads proves someone is a good researcher?! Wow. I learned something new today. Not!

I dunno what's your problem with compiled code. Millions of Windows users must be inferior to you then.

You are right. I am sorry. There are no inferior or superior people here. I was part of discussions about this puzzle ever since 2018. In is not even a 32 BTC puzzle since July 2017...
Do your own research ... I don't know why I returned to the old post. Bye.

[porkalaamiri]

if am not wrong puzzle owner someone from this topic anw nice read https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=19137.0

[digaran]

I found a way to speed up the brute force attack method, drop the hash160 conversion to address, because that conversion requires a SHA-256D, that is equal as mining bitcoin, now if we skip that part, what percentage can we gain in speed increase?

[Evillo]

I found a way to speed up the brute force attack method, drop the hash160 conversion to address, because that conversion requires a SHA-256D, that is equal as mining bitcoin, now if we skip that part, what percentage can we gain in speed increase?

True. It's how Brainflayer and keyhunt in RMD160 mode work. Much much faster and results in the same output eventually. I wish bitcrack would update to rmd mode. Might double speed.

[WanderingPhilospher]

Doing some testing on 76 bit...

Code:

KangaBGStrider v1.01
Range Start :0 (0 bit)
Range End   :FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF (76 bit)
Public Key(s) :1
Creating Stride Table...
CPU thread(s) : 8
Stride Table Complete: Max Stride: 2^36
Stride Avg Distance: 2^34.09
Number of Striders: 2^13.00
Suggested DP: 22
Expected operations: 2^41.39
Simulated DP size: 32 [0x00000000FFFFFFFF]
[31.88 MS/s][GPU 0.00 MS/s][Total Collision Checks 2^32.97][05:04 (Avg 1.0d)]
Key# 0 [1S]Pub:  0x02BF6E9A6F10A15DC828E968FC96CF9BC80A98F42227CCBE2AC4947B637B3E8FB1
       Priv: 0x865CE114686A1301A4C

Done: Total time 05:05

[WanderingPhilospher]

I found a way to speed up the brute force attack method, drop the hash160 conversion to address, because that conversion requires a SHA-256D, that is equal as mining bitcoin, now if we skip that part, what percentage can we gain in speed increase?

True. It's how Brainflayer and keyhunt in RMD160 mode work. Much much faster and results in the same output eventually. I wish bitcrack would update to rmd mode. Might double speed.

Are y'all talking about loading/searching for hash160 versus address? I ask because this comment kind of confused me, "drop the hash160 conversion to address".

[Evillo]

I found a way to speed up the brute force attack method, drop the hash160 conversion to address, because that conversion requires a SHA-256D, that is equal as mining bitcoin, now if we skip that part, what percentage can we gain in speed increase?

True. It's how Brainflayer and keyhunt in RMD160 mode work. Much much faster and results in the same output eventually. I wish bitcrack would update to rmd mode. Might double speed.

Are y'all talking about loading/searching for hash160 versus address? I ask because this comment kind of confused me, "drop the hash160 conversion to address".

Yes

[Evillo]

Doing some testing on 76 bit...

Code:

KangaBGStrider v1.01
Range Start :0 (0 bit)
Range End   :FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF (76 bit)
Public Key(s) :1
Creating Stride Table...
CPU thread(s) : 8
Stride Table Complete: Max Stride: 2^36
Stride Avg Distance: 2^34.09
Number of Striders: 2^13.00
Suggested DP: 22
Expected operations: 2^41.39
Simulated DP size: 32 [0x00000000FFFFFFFF]
[31.88 MS/s][GPU 0.00 MS/s][Total Collision Checks 2^32.97][05:04 (Avg 1.0d)]
Key# 0 [1S]Pub:  0x02BF6E9A6F10A15DC828E968FC96CF9BC80A98F42227CCBE2AC4947B637B3E8FB1
       Priv: 0x865CE114686A1301A4C

Done: Total time 05:05

This code be revolutionary if stretched all the way up to say 128 bits. Might get speed that no one managed to reach before. Congrats WP, another great build.

[WanderingPhilospher]

I found a way to speed up the brute force attack method, drop the hash160 conversion to address, because that conversion requires a SHA-256D, that is equal as mining bitcoin, now if we skip that part, what percentage can we gain in speed increase?

True. It's how Brainflayer and keyhunt in RMD160 mode work. Much much faster and results in the same output eventually. I wish bitcrack would update to rmd mode. Might double speed.

Are y'all talking about loading/searching for hash160 versus address? I ask because this comment kind of confused me, "drop the hash160 conversion to address".

Yes

Then you are correct. This has been known and Vanity, KeyhuntCuda, do in fact already do this. I’m not sure about bitcrack; I’d have to look at the code.

[Evillo]

I found a way to speed up the brute force attack method, drop the hash160 conversion to address, because that conversion requires a SHA-256D, that is equal as mining bitcoin, now if we skip that part, what percentage can we gain in speed increase?

True. It's how Brainflayer and keyhunt in RMD160 mode work. Much much faster and results in the same output eventually. I wish bitcrack would update to rmd mode. Might double speed.

Are y'all talking about loading/searching for hash160 versus address? I ask because this comment kind of confused me, "drop the hash160 conversion to address".

Yes

Then you are correct. This has been known and Vanity, KeyhuntCuda, do in fact already do this. I’m not sure about bitcrack; I’d have to look at the code.

Yeah Bitcrack is a classic try-the-privatekey-and-convert-to-full-address-then-compare-to-input-address thingy. It's fast and works on all GPU types, although it failed test on all RX 500 series 8GB GPUs for some reason. There is a random search version of it that generates millions of random sub-ranges and start searching through them sequentially. Good stuff. Not fast enough compared to Vanbitcracken. If we can drop the convert-all-the-way-to-address process, this can save a lot of time by generating output faster. Keyhuntcuda is a great example for this.

And even better, what if we can apply the prefix concept on hash160 too. Instead of looking for address prefix, we look for hash160 prefix. Even more speed. In fact, this would be the fastest way ever.

[digaran]

And even better, what if we can apply the prefix concept on hash160 too. Instead of looking for address prefix, we look for hash160 prefix. Even more speed. In fact, this would be the fastest way ever.

Won't work, rmd160 has 40 characters and by searching for their prefix, should we stop hashing half way? Meaning converting sha256 hash of public key into rmd160 but only looking for a specific prefix, either we generate the whole hash and compare with our target or we can't generate just a prefix to compare because it would break the function and we wouldn't know the result.

About brute force tools, bitcrack, vanity etc they all convert rmd160 to address, otherwise why would they accept an address as an input to check against?

[WanderingPhilospher]

And even better, what if we can apply the prefix concept on hash160 too. Instead of looking for address prefix, we look for hash160 prefix. Even more speed. In fact, this would be the fastest way ever.

Won't work, rmd160 has 40 characters and by searching for their prefix, should we stop hashing half way? Meaning converting sha256 hash of public key into rmd160 but only looking for a specific prefix, either we generate the whole hash and compare with our target or we can't generate just a prefix to compare because it would break the function and we wouldn't know the result.

About brute force tools, bitcrack, vanity etc they all convert rmd160 to address, otherwise why would they accept an address as an input to check against?

Say huh?! You have it backwards. Or at least saying it backwards. Vanity takes addresses and converts to 160.
I also believe it converts the partial strings to 160 as well; I’d have to recheck on that but I’m pretty sure it does.

[digaran]

And even better, what if we can apply the prefix concept on hash160 too. Instead of looking for address prefix, we look for hash160 prefix. Even more speed. In fact, this would be the fastest way ever.

Won't work, rmd160 has 40 characters and by searching for their prefix, should we stop hashing half way? Meaning converting sha256 hash of public key into rmd160 but only looking for a specific prefix, either we generate the whole hash and compare with our target or we can't generate just a prefix to compare because it would break the function and we wouldn't know the result.

About brute force tools, bitcrack, vanity etc they all convert rmd160 to address, otherwise why would they accept an address as an input to check against?

Say huh?! You have it backwards. Or at least saying it backwards. Vanity takes addresses and converts to 160.
I also believe it converts the partial strings to 160 as well; I’d have to recheck on that but I’m pretty sure it does.

If that's the case then there is another way to speed up the process but this would work for addresses with known public key. Searching only for the public key, saves us a sha256 and rmd160 to skip.