Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[citb0in]

It seems you are windows user and do not understand anything about linux and permissions.
Please try to understand this before posting false warnings and telling lies:


- my tool does not require any dangerous permissions (like internet access or anything else)
- my tool requires only read and write permissions in the current folder (to save the current position and the key, once it is found)

Nope, you're wrong. I'm a Linux geek. And the content of the file you're advertising is:

-rw-r--r--   1 citb0in citb0in 5,6K Jul 23 15:06 README.txt
-rwxr-xr-x   1 citb0in citb0in 1,3M Jul 23 15:06 solve66-amd-2017+*
-rwxr-xr-x   1 citb0in citb0in 1,3M Jul 23 15:06 solve66-amd-2022+*
-rwxr-xr-x   1 citb0in citb0in 1,3M Jul 23 15:06 solve66-generic*
-rwxr-xr-x   1 citb0in citb0in 1,3M Jul 23 15:06 solve66-intel-2019+*
-rwxr-xr-x   1 citb0in citb0in 1,3M Jul 23 15:06 solve66-intel-2022+*

All red marked files have been attributed by you as executable (!), PERIOD !

Code:

$ file solve66*

solve66-amd-2017+:   ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, not stripped
solve66-amd-2022+:   ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, not stripped
solve66-generic:     ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, not stripped
solve66-intel-2019+: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, not stripped
solve66-intel-2022+: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (GNU/Linux), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, not stripped

As everyone clearly sees, those are binary executables (!).

I highly suggest to everyone NOT EXECUTE ANY OF THOSE FILE, unless you know what you're doing !

I worked hard to develop this tool and i want to share it with anybody who is interested to solve #66 - that's it!

Then publish the source code of your tool on github, gitlab, or bitbucket so anyone can see what your holy ADVERTISED tool is doing in detail. Remove the binary executables, write a readme on how to compile the program. You're on Linux, right ?

[puzzle-dev]

You can't even read...

YES, there are executables in the file, yes of course these are precompiled versions (README.txt) and if you would have read the REAME.txt you would understand why i cannot publish the sources,
but you simply don't want to understand... and there are also online virus-scanners where you could upload the executeables, but you just want to tell lies...

You are a linux geek and do not even understand what PRECOMPILED means or what a SANDBOXED environment is???

If you are a linux geek you could even boot a linux live-cd, unplug all your harddrives and network connections (if you are paranoid) and simply test my tool and you will see it does no harm at all, still all you can do is telling lies.

I just hope here are some people with a brain who like my work.

It seems i am wasting my time with you, unless some more intelligent people jump in.

You really made my day...  

[citb0in]

/IGNORE

I can highly recommend everyone to think and not to download and run executables from this user who freshly registers here on the forum and advertises the miracle cure. There is no plausible explanation why the program code should not be made public. If someone really wants to help and contribute to the community in a valuable way, he usually does so in the form of open source code. This is common practice and of course also here in the forum with all code snippets or programs in the sub-forums. So every developer can read through the code and make sure what the program does and also contribute to further develop and optimize the code. All in the interest of the community.

As far as no program code is published, it can be assumed that something is hidden and obfuscated and in the worst case even malicious functions are behind the program.

Therefore, I still insist on the warning to distance yourself from these programs and not to run them under any circumstances !

[puzzle-dev]

And again just lies... I never said i found the holy grail or promised that my tools solves #66 within a day

everything is explained in the README.txt, but he simply does not want to understand it.

For everybody else who wants to try my tool:

- use an online virus scanner on the executeables
- use a sandboxed environment or a VM or a linux live-CD to test the executeables
- then you are free to judge me


I hope somebody with a good reputation can help me against these false accusations from this paranoid guy!?
It's ok to warn people, but just not with false accusations and lies...

Thanks!

[citb0in]

Everything is said. Let the user decide. Just a few words added, following parts is contained in those binary executables:

Congratulations, you found a key! Before i can send you your reward i have to verify that it is no false positive. Please send me a private message with this text: ...

if the tool has found a key, you will never see it yourself, you will have to ask the creator of the program for "approval/activation" to get your 50% share. Just imagine the case you would never receive a reply By the way, the program also contains functions that initialize and use the network stack (strange, huh?), i.e. it is quite possible that a found key is also immediately transmitted to this dubious user via an existing network connection through an initialized TLS stack. Those who are more familiar with this and want to deal with it, I encourage them to take a look at the binary executables themselves and get a picture of it. You certainly will get the idea.

Therefore, my warning still applies --> Hands off this closed-source tool!

I have developed a new tool to solve #66:

- ONLY CPU / highly optimized for speed and about 30% faster (on my CPU) than the fastest tool i know
- ONLY LINUX x86_64 / there is no and NEVER will be a WINDOWS/MAC version (DO NOT ASK!!!), but it may run on Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) / not tested
- SPECIAL SEARCH ALGORITHM/LOGIC that allows resuming search and has a higher chance to find the key (sucessfully tested on the solved puzzles!) / no stupid random or incremental search
- DUE TO LEGAL REASONS PRECOMPILED/PRECONFIGURED FOR #66 / i will release an update for #67 once #66 is solved

In short:
My tool is afaik the best option if you have access to one or more modern powerfull multicore CPUs and want to solve #66.
It still will not be easy to solve #66, but at least your chance to solve it will be higher!
All i ask you for is to split the reward (50:50) with me, if you use my tool.

If you are interested: the download link is in my profile.

NOTE: For anything regarding this tool leave me a private message! It may take some time, but i will try to answer all messages - thanks!

[puzzle-dev]

and here again you are posting false accusations

if you quote my README.txt you should also quote this:

BY USING THIS TOOL YOU AGREE TO SPLIT THE REWARD 50:50 WITH ME IF YOU FIND THE KEY. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE THEN USE OTHER TOOLS - THANKS!

and if a key is found:

Congratulations, you found a key!
Before i can send you your reward i have to verify that it is no false positive.
Please send me a private message with this text:
---
verify: _..._
wallet: YOUR WALLETADDRESS FOR THE REWARD
---

It was hard to develop this tool, so i have to make sure i get my share by verifying the key otherwise the user could just use the key and run - you see the problem?
Do you think #120 and #125 was solved with tools the guy/s have developed on their own? i don't think so! And how much did the developer of the tool they used get?

It's all about trust... you don't trust me, but i should  trust the users? we are talking about a big reward and months of work!

Of course the user has to trust me that i do not take the money and run - that's right, but think about this:
would this be wise from my point of view? NO, we have #67 and more to come, so i am very interested that whoever finds the key gets his share and uses my tool again to find the next key and i get again 50% of the reward.
If i would take the money and run i could do it only once... this would be very stupid.

I can only repeat:
my tool does not require internet permission - the key is just saved to a text file. why would i ask the user to send me message if i would send the found key over internet to me? and why would i ask for the users wallet, if my intention would be to take the money and run? so, most of your accusations are not very logical.
The TLS stuff comes from the linked libgmpxx.a which was build by compiling libgmp.a, so i linked it (i have to admit this is strange, but libgmpxx.a is not part of my code - i will have to check if libgmp.a really requires it, if not i will remove it)

As we are talking about trust and false warnings:
Why don't you warn people using the pool that is advertised here? It also includes precompiled executeables for windows and linux and unlike my tool the keys and ranges are send to a server... so to all you guys contributing to the pool: bad news - you have to trust the guy who runs the server (also a newbie), but i don't say that you cannot trust him an he will run once a key is found, but it's almost the same problem (even bigger, as internet permission is required), so it is quite strange that you talk only about my tool and not about the pool.

So i repeat:My tool works as advertised (the chance to find a key is afaik higher than with any other CPU tool i have tested) and i do not intend to run, if a key is found.
I really hope someone here here will use it and find the key - just to proof that it works and citb0in is wrong with his assumptions about me and my intentions.


I just want to get a share of the reward as a compensation for my hard work!
If you don't trust me or don't want to share the reward 50:50 then simply don't use my tool, but in this case you should also not use any pools and you should always use only open source tools you checked and compiled yourself! Or do you think precompiled executeables from github without sourcecode are more trustworthy than my tool? i guess not!

[FASTPROFITTRADER]

I'm making a 50$ contest

[digaran]

I have developed a new tool to solve #66:

- ONLY CPU / highly optimized for speed and about 30% faster (on my CPU) than the fastest tool i know
- ONLY LINUX x86_64 / there is no and NEVER will be a WINDOWS/MAC version (DO NOT ASK!!!), but it may run on Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) / not tested
- SPECIAL SEARCH ALGORITHM/LOGIC that allows resuming search and has a higher chance to find the key (sucessfully tested on the solved puzzles!) / no stupid random or incremental search
- DUE TO LEGAL REASONS PRECOMPILED/PRECONFIGURED FOR #66 / i will release an update for #67 once #66 is solved

In short:
My tool is afaik the best option if you have access to one or more modern powerfull multicore CPUs and want to solve #66.
It still will not be easy to solve #66, but at least your chance to solve it will be higher!
All i ask you for is to split the reward (50:50) with me, if you use my tool.

If you are interested: the download link is in my profile.

NOTE: For anything regarding this tool leave me a private message! It may take some time, but i will try to answer all messages - thanks!

Speed? No benchmark? We already have GPU enabled tools which are 20 to 30 times faster than CPU versions, I don't know what you are promising, but definitely your tool is not faster than others whatsoever, besides searching with CPU is useless.

[puzzle-dev]

Speed? No benchmark? We already have GPU enabled tools which are 20 to 30 times faster than CPU versions, I don't know what you are promising, but definitely your tool is not faster than others whatsoever, besides searching with CPU is useless.

You can benchmark it for yourself:
- run the fastest CPU tool you know and compare the keyrate with my tool!
On my slow CPU i get about 30% more speed (now i get about 2.6 million keys/s on one core), but the speedgain may be different on other CPUs - hard to say. I would be happy if some users would post keyrates of their CPUs.

I never talked about GPUs and said that my tool can compete with them - of course GPUs are faster, but not everybody (like me) has access to a fast GPU, but some people here may have access to fast multicore CPUs and using several cores of a modern CPU could give in total a quite good rate, even if a GPU may still be faster. All i say is that my approach/logic for searching is different and that i took a big effort in improving speed for CPUs - that's it.

Solving #66 requires not only speed, it also requires luck and with luck even a slow CPU could solve #66 - unlikely, but possible - in the end it's more lotto than a puzzle  

So, if you have a fast GPU then you should use it and in this case my tool is of course not helpfull for you at all.

[ripemdhash]

Never ever run anything compiled by unknown individuals without the possibility of inspecting the source code. Never trust individuals who include "forcing" the sending of a private key in file contents, no matter how it sounds. Never run it on an instance where you have your own wallet, preferably on a VM instance without internet access, and in general, compiled programs without source code should be automatically blocked.

[modma]

I have developed a new tool to solve #66:

- ONLY CPU / highly optimized for speed and about 30% faster (on my CPU) than the fastest tool i know
- ONLY LINUX x86_64 / there is no and NEVER will be a WINDOWS/MAC version (DO NOT ASK!!!), but it may run on Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) / not tested
- SPECIAL SEARCH ALGORITHM/LOGIC that allows resuming search and has a higher chance to find the key (sucessfully tested on the solved puzzles!) / no stupid random or incremental search
- DUE TO LEGAL REASONS PRECOMPILED/PRECONFIGURED FOR #66 / i will release an update for #67 once #66 is solved

30 percent faster than what? Can I have a specific example?
you are talking about an increased chance of searching - how is this statement justified?
PS do not install code from an unknown source.

[modma]

Speed? No benchmark? We already have GPU enabled tools which are 20 to 30 times faster than CPU versions, I don't know what you are promising, but definitely your tool is not faster than others whatsoever, besides searching with CPU is useless.

On my slow CPU i get about 30% more speed (now i get about 2.6 million keys/s on one core), but the speedgain may be different on other CPUs - hard to say. I would be happy if some users would post keyrates of their CPUs.

what cave did you come out of?
KEYHUNT by alberto 4 million keys per stream.
bitcrack 3 million keys per stream.
I personally have GPU generation - 4 billion keys per second.
And this is in open source - which the developers provided for free.

[puzzle-dev]

This is my last reply regarding useless speed comparisions:


you simply have to compare the speed of my tool with your prefered tool on your own!!!
MY TOOL IS FOR CPU *NOT* FOR GPU - GPUs ARE FASTER - I KNOW IT - EVERYBODY KNOWS IT!


i just gave you a number for my very slow CPU and only on one core and this is a mobile CPU! This does not say anything about keyrates on your CPU!
if your prefered tool is faster, then use it and be happy with it! On my CPU my tool is faster - is this so hard to understand?

you are talking about an increased chance of searching - how is this statement justified?

only through tests...
i run competiton tests between my tool and other CPU tools and my tool always found the key faster, so i guess my search logic works somehow better than a simple random search, but you cannot exspect miracles like a 10x speed improvement.

[modma]

this is a mobile CPU! This does not say anything about keyrates on your CPU!

very strange argument.
Next time, tell me about new mathematics right away.

[mcdouglasx]

You can't even read...

 and there are also online virus-scanners where you could upload the executeables, but you just want to tell lies...

online scanner Lol, to bypass all antivirus you only need tools like pyarmor and other techniques that I will not mention for the sake of honest people.

[unclevito]

This is my last reply regarding useless speed comparisions:


you simply have to compare the speed of my tool with your prefered tool on your own!!!
MY TOOL IS FOR CPU *NOT* FOR GPU - GPUs ARE FASTER - I KNOW IT - EVERYBODY KNOWS IT!


i just gave you a number for my very slow CPU and only on one core and this is a mobile CPU! This does not say anything about keyrates on your CPU!
if your prefered tool is faster, then use it and be happy with it! On my CPU my tool is faster - is this so hard to understand?

you are talking about an increased chance of searching - how is this statement justified?

only through tests...
i run competiton tests between my tool and other CPU tools and my tool always found the key faster, so i guess my search logic works somehow better than a simple random search, but you cannot exspect miracles like a 10x speed improvement.

I downloaded them this morning and ran them through the online scanner and they were all clean. Ran the generic on wsl and it worked 1 thread as about 2 mil/second older Xeon it seems to make a file that is either a checkpoint or remembers the addresses tried or both. works well but since I paid for a rtx GPU and made a control program so it runs unattended I am going to use that, but for CPU users it should be ok. Suggestion: put them on github and maybe others will be more comfortable then being on a file share website which makes others a little suspicious. you can open a free account there.

[puzzle-dev]

I downloaded them this morning and ran them through the online scanner and they were all clean. Ran the generic on wsl and it worked 1 thread as about 2 mil/second older Xeon it seems to make a file that is either a checkpoint or remembers the addresses tried or both. works well but since I paid for a rtx GPU and made a control program so it runs unattended I am going to use that, but for CPU users it should be ok. Suggestion: put them on github and maybe others will be more comfortable then being on a file share website which makes others a little suspicious. you can open a free account there.

Thanks for your trust and reply!

I don't know if it helps to gain more trust, but i updated the tool, removed the executeable permissions and included a warning about running binaries from unknown sources in the README.txt and added some hints how to run binaries if you do not trust the developer. Actually there are serveral tools on github where binaries are included (like iceland and the pool) and there are no sources available for these tools available, so i don't see a big difference if i would use github. I do not exspect anybody to trust me, but at least to be fair. i just offer a different approach an my tool is quite fast on CPUs and it would be very interesting to see the keyrates on modern CPUs.

[digaran]

i just offer a different approach an my tool is quite fast on CPUs and it would be very interesting to see the keyrates on modern CPUs.

Why don't you share this different approach in details with the rest of us? If it was working, you wouldn't be here talking, instead you'd have rented hundreds of CPUs to find #66.

[GR Sasa]

Guys, stop the hate and the harassment of him!

Yes there's a doubt; The "Developer" could be suspected; Yes it could be a scam; Yes it could have a trojan; But it could be also real!

It's just a doubt, you are guys acting like he's 100% fake and scammer which is of course not the case! Nobody knows if he's real or not, but at least you could've friendly just asked him to upload his source code to GitHub instead of attacking him like this! What if he's real? You can't imagine how bad he will feel. You guys are hurting him so stop it please! We don't know if he's real or not, so we can't judge him that early!!

Maybe he's real and really developed a tool for CPU users for help. Who knows? And yes, it's his right for him to ask for 50% since he is the developer of it.

@puzzle-dev We apologize for that, but we are a sensitive community, so please we respectfully ask you to upload its source code just incase for us to be in the safe side.

Thanks,

[digaran]

@puzzle-dev We apologize for that, but we are a sensitive community, so please we respectfully ask you to upload its source code just incase for us to be in the safe side.

Thanks,

Did you just use good cop, bad cop method on him? Lol.
If he wanted to share the code, he'd have done it at the first place and nobody would have attacked him.

In case some of you haven't noticed, around these woods we paint toads and sell them as porsche!

Personally I have nothing against him, I know enough not to run the tool, even if I do I have nothing of value on my system.
Besides, his tool, your tool, my tool, none of them really help unless you have 100+ GPUs, then having that many GPUs, you wouldn't go for #66, you'd use them to search for #130. So if we are talking about "luck" searching a site like keys.lol should do the trick, if it's up to your "luck" clicking on page numbers is enough or buying a lottery ticket could also give a better result. Being "lucky" is not exclusive to finding a puzzle key, So your and his argument is not reasonable.