Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[WanderingPhilospher]

The moment you send out puzzle 66 and reveal it's public key, some looter will double spend your 1 year effort in a few seconds, so there is a reason why nobody joins you, they want it for free.

Even if using the do not RBF option?

[WanderingPhilospher]

Doesn't matter RBF or not, you could still double spend the tx, that's why nobody is solving it, unless someone gives the transaction to a miner and they include the whole balance as fee in a block they mine, you could also sign a message with some undeniable proof that you have found the key sooner than anyone else in order to provide it to the pool which mines the tx if you are going to fight the looters until the whole balance is spent as fee.

Ok, walk me through this.

I thought if a transaction was broadcast with do not RBF, do not Replace By Fee (higher transaction fee), then it could not be double spent.

Not true?

[3dmlib]

That depends which nodes and pools honor that protocol, you could simply be tricked by a pool operator, they could solve the key and include the tx in a block, there are many ways to double spend it. Unless every single node, miner, pool honors the RBF disabled flag. There is no guarantee for your puzzle 66, 67, 68 etc to be safe from looters.

Hello. Can RBF transaction be on different receiver address or only fee can be increased for faster processing, but receiver address should be same as in initial first transaction? Thanks.

[CY4NiDE]

If normally it would not be safe, imagine now with the mempool being congested as it is. It would not be wise to transfer anything out of the lower range wallets for a while if you manage to open one.

[WanderingPhilospher]

There are no limits on changing the address or fees, those limits are only on some wallets, otherwise you can change the fee, and receiving address by default as many times. If you are fighting a looter by double spending, it's better that you send the new tx to the initially intended address, but things like that should be automated.

If normally it would not be safe, imagine now with the mempool being congested as it is. It would not be wise to transfer anything out of the lower range wallets for a while if you manage to open one.

Yet someone snuck out #64....

It really makes no sense, I guess all that reading I did was wrong, about not using the RBF option, etc.

I guess I'll just have to take my chances.

[CY4NiDE]

Yet someone snuck out #64....

It really makes no sense, I guess all that reading I did was wrong, about not using the RBF option, etc.

I guess I'll just have to take my chances.

I've read that most wallets are dropping the option to disable RBF, it's usually on by default now.

One can no longer find this option in the newest Electrum versions for example. Would need a version older than 4.4.0 to get that option back.

Also, #64 had 0.6 BTC back in 2022 when it was cracked.

While I don't consider that to be no little amount, the stakes are much higher now at 6.6 BTC for wallet #66.

I guess the solver would need to wait for the Russians to go to sleep before sneaking out those funds.  

[citb0in]

Take your chances by deploying a bot to compete with the looter, otherwise you can kiss your coins good bye. Or just talk  with a large pool beforehand, you could offer them $10,000 bonus and if they include the tx in their block, other pools won't dare to mine that block again just to take those extra coins.

So you are claiming that any Bitcoin transaction could be double-spended and therefore all Bitcoin transactions are insecure. Makes sense ?

What do you think of a challenge? I transfer an amount of x coins, you only know the source address, which I will publish here. Its private key will be in the range of 66bit just like the mentioned puzzle. Then you siphon off the coins and transfer them to another address before I receive them just like you described the looter would. If the coins end up at your freely chosen address, you can keep them. If they end up with me, you have lost and made a fool of yourself. Deal ?

[WanderingPhilospher]

Take your chances by deploying a bot to compete with the looter, otherwise you can kiss your coins good bye. Or just talk  with a large pool beforehand, you could offer them $10,000 bonus and if they include the tx in their block, other pools won't dare to mine that block again just to take those extra coins.

So you are claiming that any Bitcoin transaction could be double-spended and therefore all Bitcoin transactions are insecure. Makes sense ?

What do you think of a challenge? I transfer an amount of x coins, you only know the source address, which I will publish here. Then you siphon off the coins and transfer them to another address before I receive them just like you described the looter would. If the coins end up at your freely chosen address, you can keep them. If they end up with me, you have lost and made a fool of yourself. Deal ?

I am pretty sure he's only talking about the low bit challenge/puzzles, like #66.

[citb0in]

I forgot to mention that I will use a private within the 66bit key range, I edited my post above.

[Venus Blue]

Take your chances by deploying a bot to compete with the looter, otherwise you can kiss your coins good bye. Or just talk  with a large pool beforehand, you could offer them $10,000 bonus and if they include the tx in their block, other pools won't dare to mine that block again just to take those extra coins.

So you are claiming that any Bitcoin transaction could be double-spended and therefore all Bitcoin transactions are insecure. Makes sense ?

What do you think of a challenge? I transfer an amount of x coins, you only know the source address, which I will publish here. Then you siphon off the coins and transfer them to another address before I receive them just like you described the looter would. If the coins end up at your freely chosen address, you can keep them. If they end up with me, you have lost and made a fool of yourself. Deal ?

I am pretty sure he's only talking about the low bit challenge/puzzles, like #66.

Yeah... #66, #67, #68 and so on can be cracked within seconds using Kangaroo. I'm pretty sure there are bots watching those addresses. As soon as those pubkeys go live people will be warned and they'll have at least a 5-10 minutes window to solve the key and RBF. Right now with the Ordinals situation that window could be greater, specially if the solver decides to cheap out with the fees...

[3dmlib]

#66, #67, #68 and so on can be cracked within seconds using Kangaroo. I'm pretty sure there are bots watching those addresses.

Is placing transaction (with transaction fee enough to be included in next block) in the last second before new block will be mined will help?

[Venus Blue]

#66, #67, #68 and so on can be cracked within seconds using Kangaroo. I'm pretty sure there are bots watching those addresses.

Is placing transaction (with transaction fee enough to be included in next block) in the last second before new block will be mined will help?

I'm not sure, someone else with more knowledge than I will be able to better answer you. Although that's something I also thought of doing...  

[AlanJohnson]

I don't why out of sudden doublespend or replacemant is a problem with puzzle 66 but wasn't before with other puzzles ...

[zahid888]

Take your chances by deploying a bot to compete with the looter, otherwise you can kiss your coins good bye. Or just talk  with a large pool beforehand, you could offer them $10,000 bonus and if they include the tx in their block, other pools won't dare to mine that block again just to take those extra coins.

So you are claiming that any Bitcoin transaction could be double-spended and therefore all Bitcoin transactions are insecure. Makes sense ?

What do you think of a challenge? I transfer an amount of x coins, you only know the source address, which I will publish here. Its private key will be in the range of 66bit just like the mentioned puzzle. Then you siphon off the coins and transfer them to another address before I receive them just like you described the looter would. If the coins end up at your freely chosen address, you can keep them. If they end up with me, you have lost and made a fool of yourself. Deal ?

He is speaking quite accurately. I have witnessed numerous instances where some private keys which have been compromised. Many individuals have set up auto-send bots with those compromised keys. If any funds accidentally land there, they are immediately transferred, and it waits for confirmation. Suddenly, a miner arrives and brings 1 confirmation with him. Before the individuals transaction is confirmed, it conflicts with the 1 confirmation, and the funds are transferred to the miner who broadcasts the tx_hash with The hellll 1 confirmation with his pocket . I watch such cases about 4 or 5 times in a month. 1 ex: below


I urge Satoshi Nakamoto to promptly close this loophole. Only then will it be enjoyable to take on the challenge of this puzzle. Otherwise, it would be better for all of us to gracefully withdraw from this challenge. The one who has the private key and has signed the first transaction with sufficient fees, until that transaction is confirmed, no other tx_hash related to that address should be submitted in the mempool. Implementing this much is not a difficult task.

[nomachine]

I don't why out of sudden doublespend or replacemant is a problem with puzzle 66 but wasn't before with other puzzles ...

Or 67, 68, 69?   

[Kamoheapohea]

The solution is "exclusive mining".

As a "proof of solution" you create a hash of the privatekey (or publickey), your username and bitcoin address and post the hash here and/or other services where you have a (more or less) trusted timestamp.
This is your evidence that you solved the key before any other person.

You create your transaction locally and pick one of the big (and trusted) miningpools and send your transaction directly to the pool (contact them via E-Mail or maybe they have a preferred way of contacting). This way the public-key will never get into the mempool.

[modma]

But couldn't disabling rbf and banning the use of wallets for change solve this problem?

[tmar777]

Hi guys,

I am not sure if here is the correct place to ask but I need your help.
I need a secure, checked and efficient script that gets binaries (256bit) and returns:

1) private key (c)
2) private key (u)
3) public address in hex
4) public address
5) balance

or at least some of the above. As for the 5, i know that i need a connection to the API, so i prefer to suggest me of two different scripts because i want to run the 1-4 offline locally for speed.

If you have anything in mind TESTED and SECURE please let me know where to look.
Thanks

[AlanJohnson]

You should use Bitcrack > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4453897.0
There is no need to check balance via API, you just place all funded addresses in a text file and set it as target, then the tool will grind through the range and if there is a match, it will save it to a file.

I've done that already. Waste of time for lower bit ranges and for higher it takes too long.

I can tell you one thing everything that can be stolen on bitcoin blockchain is already stolen

[pseudospace]

Hello, sorry if this is a dumb question or has already been answered in a place I'm failing to find, I'm wondering if there is there any knowledge (or speculation!) of the methodology which was used in the creation of the transaction?

Many thanks

pseudospace.