Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[nomachine]

if your are trying to break a seed and get all the keys from deterministic wallet that not gonna work...

Something other than that. If you haven't seen what this script does, it's not worth explaining. Start in order from Puzzle 15.

[1715346453]

1715346453

[1715346453]

1715346453

[1715346453]

1715346453

[zahid888]

I have converted almost all Bitcoin addresses (P2PKH, P2SH) from base58 to hex and matched them with 40 million addresses. Below are some examples. Additionally, I have explored using these base58 values as a seed (from max-35 to min-8). Apart from this, I have also generated MD5, SHA1, SHA224, SHA256, SHA384[:64], SHA512[:64], BLAKE2B, and BLAKE2S hex values from these base58. Please refrain from attempting these and avoid wasting time.

Do you see any pattern or something? I don't see something valuable here.

I have noticed that there is a very small difference in each pair. And puzzle 66 is a pair of puzzle 70
So we have to make minor changes here

                 Puzzle 70


One more thing: every pair is smaller than its second, instead of only one pair.

puzzle: 34 frontHex: 34a65911 Binary: 110100101001100101100100010001        Zeros: 17        Ones: 13
puzzle: 38 frontHex: 22382fac Binary: 100010001110000010111110101100        Zeros: 16        Ones: 14

Based on this assumption 66 is smaller then 349b84b6...... Hope so.. .. If there are any other assumptions in someone's mind, they are welcome, because life is too short to guess even 30 bit.. 

[tmar777]

I have converted almost all Bitcoin addresses (P2PKH, P2SH) from base58 to hex and matched them with 40 million addresses. Below are some examples. Additionally, I have explored using these base58 values as a seed (from max-35 to min-8). Apart from this, I have also generated MD5, SHA1, SHA224, SHA256, SHA384[:64], SHA512[:64], BLAKE2B, and BLAKE2S hex values from these base58. Please refrain from attempting these and avoid wasting time.
https://www.talkimg.com/images/2023/12/24/Izsbj.png

Do you see any pattern or something? I don't see something valuable here.

I have noticed that there is a very small difference in each pair. And puzzle 66 is a pair of puzzle 70
So we have to make minor changes here

                 Puzzle 70
https://www.talkimg.com/images/2023/11/14/zTZS8.png

One more thing: every pair is smaller than its second, instead of only one pair.

puzzle: 34 frontHex: 34a65911 Binary: 110100101001100101100100010001        Zeros: 17        Ones: 13
puzzle: 38 frontHex: 22382fac Binary: 100010001110000010111110101100        Zeros: 16        Ones: 14

Based on this assumption 66 is smaller then 349b84b6...... Hope so.. .. If there are any other assumptions in someone's mind, they are welcome, because life is too short to guess even 30 bit.. 

Man, sorry it may be my brain that doesn't get it but I understand nothing.
"I have noticed that there is a very small difference in each pair. And puzzle 66 is a pair of puzzle 70 " in what pair do you refer to? pair mean there 2 things...
 "every pair is smaller than its second, instead of only one pair."
Also, can you provide a link to the binary graph that you use?

[nomachine]

life is too short to guess even 30 bit.. 

Everything is great up to 50bit. Above that, I either don't have enough CPU or RAM or the number of GPUs or all together. And I don't have money to rent 100 GPUs.

[citb0in]

And I don't have money to rent 100 GPUs.

even if you did, what would you hope to achieve?

[AlanJohnson]

life is too short to guess even 30 bit.. 

Everything is great up to 50bit. Above that, I either don't have enough CPU or RAM or the number of GPUs or all together. And I don't have money to rent 100 GPUs.

50bit ?   

Using Kangaroo i can solve every puzzle till 100 bit in very short time (of course im talking about puzzles where public key is available). Till 70 bit it's almost immediatley.

The problem is the range is getting exponetnially bigger to the extent it's just too big for current hardware (at least available for home users).

[zahid888]

in what pair do you refer to?

       Pair - 1                    Pair - 2                   Pair - 3                     Pair - 4                    Pair - 5                     Pair - 6                    Pair - 7                   Pair - 8              Pair 9 Assumption
                 
Upon observing this, I bear no responsibility if someone's eyesight is adversely affected. LoL   Again, I would like to say that making assumptions instead of blindly following random numbers is not inherently negative, whether the outcome is favorable or not.

life is too short to guess even 30 bit..  

Everything is great up to 50bit. Above that, I either don't have enough CPU or RAM or the number of GPUs or all together. And I don't have money to rent 100 GPUs.

50bit ?  

Using Kangaroo i can solve every puzzle till 100 bit in very short time (of course im talking about puzzles where public key is available). Till 70 bit it's almost immediatley.

The problem is the range is getting exponetnially bigger to the extent it's just too big for current hardware (at least available for home users).

Hmmm.. i can do this in a second

Pubkey : 026a6cb130f0f374bbe6cf5499cce541d2b2a86c1ca2007424547f686907f79c36
Address : 13z11bUYcdnHNn4NKwrxdf6r695YxKh5so
Range : 66 Bit

Someone put There fund i don't know what the helll he is trying to do.. you guys can sweep it.. https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/13z11bUYcdnHNn4NKwrxdf6r695YxKh5so

[mcdouglasx]

Using Kangaroo i can solve every puzzle till 100 bit in very short time (of course im talking about puzzles where public key is available). Till 70 bit it's almost immediatley.

The problem is the range is getting exponetnially bigger to the extent it's just too big for current hardware (at least available for home users).

If you can handle 100 bits, why don't you solve puzzle #130? If I had that power I would have already found it.

[AlanJohnson]

Using Kangaroo i can solve every puzzle till 100 bit in very short time (of course im talking about puzzles where public key is available). Till 70 bit it's almost immediatley.

The problem is the range is getting exponetnially bigger to the extent it's just too big for current hardware (at least available for home users).

If you can handle 100 bits, why don't you solve puzzle #130? If I had that power I would have already found it.

Cause estimated time for solving 100bit i have in DAYS while estimated time for 130bit i have in HUNDREDS OF YEARS. This shows how massive is the gap between these two ranges. People seems to not realize that.

[WanderingPhilospher]

Using Kangaroo i can solve every puzzle till 100 bit in very short time (of course im talking about puzzles where public key is available). Till 70 bit it's almost immediatley.

The problem is the range is getting exponetnially bigger to the extent it's just too big for current hardware (at least available for home users).

If you can handle 100 bits, why don't you solve puzzle #130? If I had that power I would have already found it.

Cause estimated time for solving 100bit i have in DAYS while estimated time for 130bit i have in HUNDREDS OF YEARS. This shows how massive is the gap between these two ranges. People seems to not realize that.

I mean it’s “only” 2^30 times bigger. 😂
So if you could solve 2^100 in a day, it would “only” take 1 billion days to solve 2^130.
That’s using traditional Kangaroo method only.
Maybe some ways you can shortcut it, but having enough equipment helps.

[mcdouglasx]

Using Kangaroo i can solve every puzzle till 100 bit in very short time (of course im talking about puzzles where public key is available). Till 70 bit it's almost immediatley.

The problem is the range is getting exponetnially bigger to the extent it's just too big for current hardware (at least available for home users).

If you can handle 100 bits, why don't you solve puzzle #130? If I had that power I would have already found it.

Cause estimated time for solving 100bit i have in DAYS while estimated time for 130bit i have in HUNDREDS OF YEARS. This shows how massive is the gap between these two ranges. People seems to not realize that.

That's assuming you unlock directly using the publickey of puzzle #130, but certain techniques allow you to go from 130 to 100 or less.

[WanderingPhilospher]

Using Kangaroo i can solve every puzzle till 100 bit in very short time (of course im talking about puzzles where public key is available). Till 70 bit it's almost immediatley.

The problem is the range is getting exponetnially bigger to the extent it's just too big for current hardware (at least available for home users).

If you can handle 100 bits, why don't you solve puzzle #130? If I had that power I would have already found it.

Cause estimated time for solving 100bit i have in DAYS while estimated time for 130bit i have in HUNDREDS OF YEARS. This shows how massive is the gap between these two ranges. People seems to not realize that.

That's assuming you unlock directly using the publickey of puzzle #130, but certain techniques allow you to go from 130 to 100 or less.

You can go to 80, 64, 52, 12 or 1. Doesn't mean it's faster.

Just by reducing the bit range doesn't make it faster, without new code being able to run multiple pub keys at once, etc.


I really find it hard to believe, actually, I don't find it hard to believe, that within this community of people who follow these posts, we can't get enough people, that have a combined total of 500 GPUs, whether it's 500 people with 1 GPU each or 100 people with 5 GPUs each, or a mixture of people and GPU quantities...
But we can't get 500 GPUs to crack #66 in less than a year, if we had 1,000 GPUs, right at 6 months.
It's kind of funny, but not

The current 66 bit pool, that is running, is doing double the work.

I may do some tinkering over the next few weeks and set up some sort of pool, more than likely just keep it personal, because exposing servers to the public, there's always those 1 or 2 peeps who spend time trying to hack it lol.

Anywho, 500 GPUs = #66 found in less than a year.

[AlanJohnson]

I really find it hard to believe, actually, I don't find it hard to believe, that within this community of people who follow these posts, we can't get enough people, that have a combined total of 500 GPUs, whether it's 500 people with 1 GPU each or 100 people with 5 GPUs each, or a mixture of people and GPU quantities...
But we can't get 500 GPUs to crack #66 in less than a year, if we had 1,000 GPUs, right at 6 months.
It's kind of funny, but not

The current 66 bit pool, that is running, is doing double the work.

I may do some tinkering over the next few weeks and set up some sort of pool, more than likely just keep it personal, because exposing servers to the public, there's always those 1 or 2 peeps who spend time trying to hack it lol.

Anywho, 500 GPUs = #66 found in less than a year.

There is massive lack of trust in crypro sphere. Why should i trust anybody that he will pay me anything in case of solving puzzle or even my part for scanning some ranges ?

[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 ?