Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[vneos]

HI everyone, maybe someone here can explain to me how public key subtraction works? Thanks.

[nomachine]

HI everyone, maybe someone here can explain to me how public key subtraction works? Thanks.

Or even better.... a simplified NSA accelerated study on how to solve any puzzle with key-subtraction.

[albert0bsd]

I have developed a new method!
I have studied it 100% and it works.
My calculations tell me that before the end of January 2024 I will have unlocked puzzle #130 (if someone else doesn't solve it before).
For registration, I will send it to this address BTC bc1qxs47ttydl8tmdv8vtygp7dy76lvayz3r6rdahu

This message will not have edits for its validity.

If you want to question it, do it on February 1, 2024 if I don't send it to that address.

happy new year in advance, see you in February!, if life allows me.

blessings for all.

Quoting this just for archive right now puzzle 130 is 610K USD not bad lets to see how much is on Feb 1st.

[FlleOWA]

Using division and other manipulations of the public key of puzzle 130, we managed to obtain the key 02000000000000000000000003b78ce563f89a0ed9414f5aa28ad0d96d6795f9c63
Someone tell me what sense does this make? For now I’m just researching what kind of public key this is.
I apologize if for my stupidity. It’s just that the specialists here are on topic, unlike me.

[mcdouglasx]

Using division and other manipulations of the public key of puzzle 130, we managed to obtain the key 02000000000000000000000003b78ce563f89a0ed9414f5aa28ad0d96d6795f9c63
Someone tell me what sense does this make? For now I’m just researching what kind of public key this is.
I apologize if for my stupidity. It’s just that the specialists here are on topic, unlike me.

edit:
that pub key is equivalent to inverrse N/2

pk=7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF5D576E7357A4501DDFE92F46681B20A1

[alek76]

Is Digaran talking to himself again  

In the meantime I rewrite the GPUHash.h file
GPU constant memory is not used in hash functions. I checked the program's operation on PK 40 bit. It works, but the speed is the same.
https://github.com/alek76-2/VanitySearch/blob/main/mod/other_files/GPUHash_nc.h

Can someone test it?

[CY4NiDE]

I have found a few interesting hints regarding the puzzle 130, since I don't know the actual private key, I will just leave them here for the author to verify.
Are the following values related to the puzzle 130 in any way? Like being the last characters, first characters, the key being divisible by them etc?
3c8
f2
ec

If yes then I might be onto something. Then I'd need a hint to follow up on it, you might also want to check the inverse key as well.

I think that if the creator was to come here and give us hints, this would defeat the purpose of his creation which is to measure our cracking capabilities.

Can't really be giving out hints in an experiment like this one, we must check our own leads and see what comes out of it.

[vneos]

I think I figured out how publickey subtraction works. I apologize if I misunderstood.
But I have a question, in programs that support multiple publickeys as input, such as kangaroo and keyhunt, do they look up all the publickeys in parallel? Or do they just look them up line by line? So far in my testing, JLP's kangaroo does lookup line by line, which would be very slow to lookup all publickeys, so what is the point of publickey subtraction?

[rosengold]

In the meantime I rewrite the GPUHash.h file
GPU constant memory is not used in hash functions. I checked the program's operation on PK 40 bit. It works, but the speed is the same.
https://github.com/alek76-2/VanitySearch/blob/main/mod/other_files/GPUHash_nc.h

Can someone test it?

nice work alek !

could you please add a stride function on it ?

[alek76]

In the meantime I rewrite the GPUHash.h file
GPU constant memory is not used in hash functions. I checked the program's operation on PK 40 bit. It works, but the speed is the same.
https://github.com/alek76-2/VanitySearch/blob/main/mod/other_files/GPUHash_nc.h

Can someone test it?

nice work alek !

could you please add a stride function on it ?

There, for starting keys in the getGPUStartingKeys function, the step is set here.

Code:

else {
      //
      keys[i].Set(&startKey);
      Int offT((uint64_t)i);
      //offT.ShiftL(32);  
      Int offG((uint64_t)thId);
      //offG.ShiftL(40);
      // new offset
      int nbBit = startKey.GetBitLength();
      offT.ShiftL((uint32_t)(nbBit / 2));
      offG.ShiftL((uint32_t)(nbBit - 4));
      //
      keys[i].Add(&offT);
      keys[i].Add(&offG);
      if (i < 10 || i > nbThread - 10) { printf("Bit %d GPU startKey Base Key %d: %s\n", Random_bits, i,             
      keys[i].GetBase16().c_str()); }
      //
}

I don’t want to, I will need to recalculate the distance traveled and create an addition for a new start of the keys. A table and steps are used. +1 and -1 further to +512 and -512 Delta is needed to increase the speed when calculating the inversion modulo distance - this is when adding points.
You can generate starting keys in increments. The dot addition step cannot be changed.
For example, you won’t be able to add 16, 64 or 2048. The addition step is 1 - all because of the table.

[nomachine]

I think that if the creator was to come here and give us hints, this would defeat the purpose of his creation which is to measure our cracking capabilities.

Can't really be giving out hints in an experiment like this one, we must check our own leads and see what comes out of it.

He succeeded in his idea. He showed our cracking capabilities  are poor.

Prize: 988.498 BTC (total), 31.998 BTC (won), 956.5 BTC (remaining)

His 956 BTC is relatively safe even the whole world knows the ranges where the private keys are.

[alek76]

Optimized code a little.
https://github.com/alek76-2/VanitySearch/blob/main/mod/other_files/GPUHash_nc_optimized.h
Previously, the data array was transferred from one function to another when initializing RIPEMD160.
I put the constants directly into the RIPEMD160Transform() function.
Now the question is, can this be optimized using compiler options? The uint32_t * array is no longer used.

Code:

__device__ void RIPEMD160Transform(uint32_t s[5],uint32_t* w) {

  uint32_t u;
  //uint32_t a1 = s[0], b1 = s[1], c1 = s[2], d1 = s[3], e1 = s[4];
  //uint32_t a2 = a1, b2 = b1, c2 = c1, d2 = d1, e2 = e1;
  
  uint32_t a1 = 0x67452301ul, b1 = 0xEFCDAB89ul, c1 = 0x98BADCFEul, d1 = 0x10325476ul, e1 = 0xC3D2E1F0ul;
  uint32_t a2 = a1, b2 = b1, c2 = c1, d2 = d1, e2 = e1;

  //uint32_t t = s[0];
  //s[0] = s[1] + c1 + d2;
  //s[1] = s[2] + d1 + e2;
  //s[2] = s[3] + e1 + a2;
  //s[3] = s[4] + a1 + b2;
  //s[4] = t + b1 + c2;
  
  //uint32_t t = 0x67452301ul;
  s[0] = 0xEFCDAB89ul + c1 + d2;
  s[1] = 0x98BADCFEul + d1 + e2;
  s[2] = 0x10325476ul + e1 + a2;
  s[3] = 0xC3D2E1F0ul + a1 + b2;
  s[4] = 0x67452301ul + b1 + c2;//s[4] = t + b1 + c2;

Or will the compiler do it itself now? Who can test the speed and correctness of the code?
I checked it on Tesla T4, this code works.

[mcdouglasx]

I think that if the creator was to come here and give us hints, this would defeat the purpose of his creation which is to measure our cracking capabilities.

Can't really be giving out hints in an experiment like this one, we must check our own leads and see what comes out of it.

He succeeded in his idea. He showed our cracking capabilities  are poor.

Prize: 988.498 BTC (total), 31.998 BTC (won), 956.5 BTC (remaining)

His 956 BTC is relatively safe even the whole world knows the ranges where the private keys are.

I sometimes think that the creator has been withdrawing the BTC from the undisclosed wallets in recent years, I see no reason why someone who unlocks the puzzle should not share their keys anonymously once the wallet is emptied, either that or there is a possible sequence that we are not seeing.

[CY4NiDE]

He succeeded in his idea. He showed our cracking capabilities  are poor.

Prize: 988.498 BTC (total), 31.998 BTC (won), 956.5 BTC (remaining)

His 956 BTC is relatively safe even the whole world knows the ranges where the private keys are.

Yeah, for now it seems like the progress is halted, but as tech gets better this challenge will always provide a way of seeing where our capabilities are capping.

I sometimes think that the creator has been withdrawing the BTC from the undisclosed wallets in recent years, I see no reason why someone who unlocks the puzzle should not share their keys anonymously once the wallet is emptied, either that or there is a possible sequence that we are not seeing.

I feel like the people cracking these are keeping the keys for themselves 'cause the creator might send more funds to those wallets one day, as this already happened before.

Didn't #125 have like 1.25 BTC the day it was opened, and later on it got +11 BTC sent to it?

That would be a pretty good reason to keep these keys close to your chest.

[mcdouglasx]

I feel like the people cracking these are keeping the keys for themselves 'cause the creator might send more funds to those wallets one day, as this already happened before.

Didn't #125 have like 1.25 BTC the day it was opened, and later on it got +11 BTC sent to it?

That would be a pretty good reason to keep these keys close to your chest.

Because 125 had not been deciphered at that time, as you will see, 120 did not receive anything else.

[FlleOWA]

I think that if the creator was to come here and give us hints, this would defeat the purpose of his creation which is to measure our cracking capabilities.

Can't really be giving out hints in an experiment like this one, we must check our own leads and see what comes out of it.

He succeeded in his idea. He showed our cracking capabilities  are poor.

Prize: 988.498 BTC (total), 31.998 BTC (won), 956.5 BTC (remaining)

His 956 BTC is relatively safe even the whole world knows the ranges where the private keys are.

I sometimes think that the creator has been withdrawing the BTC from the undisclosed wallets in recent years, I see no reason why someone who unlocks the puzzle should not share their keys anonymously once the wallet is emptied, either that or there is a possible sequence that we are not seeing.

Behind the creation of this puzzle is a 100% mathematician scientist. And it was not created to test the security of Bitcoin. But for your own purposes. 1000 coins is the minimum deposit to get more. As a rule, there is no point in testing brute force and this is understandable. But it makes sense to look for vulnerabilities in the curve. And even a person without education can stumble upon a vulnerability and not understand what it is, but write about it in the topic. And the creator, for example, will be able to understand what to do with it and calmly gain access to wallets with a huge balance, recouping their costs.

[FlleOWA]

So are you accusing the puzzle creator of theft? Meaning he will later empty other people's wallets?

Here is another embarrassment for all the so called educated people, my post above, if you can, go ahead and solve it. 😂

Not necessary. He can then empty dead wallets from which there will be no demand. And as far as we know, there are a lot of lost wallets, especially wallets that did not have outgoing transactions after 2012. And this will not be theft, since even the real owner will not be able to confirm his right to this wallet. And you can easily, having a private key, say that it was yours, you just recently managed to find the key.

We all know that there is no system created by people that does not have vulnerabilities. Everything breaks. And Bitcoin too. It may even already be hacked, just why talk about it, withdraw your money and live happily.
Every year billions are stolen from the Visa and Maestro systems, but they don’t talk about it so you don’t panic. Even the Apple system is not secure as advertised.

Just if I could find a vulnerability that allows me to get any private key. I would quietly and calmly rummage through dead small wallets and cash out through exchangers. Why would I leak such information and put my life in danger? Such news will reset the price and many will simply lose billions, and many will want to take revenge on me for this.

[FlleOWA]

So are you accusing the puzzle creator of theft? Meaning he will later empty other people's wallets?

Here is another embarrassment for all the so called educated people, my post above, if you can, go ahead and solve it. 😂

Because it would be better than having a selected group to have access to the whole thing, imagine if someone had a backdoor to Bitcoin, do you know what they could do to anyone with huge stakes?

So which scenario is better? To have access to all the coins secretly and doing whatever you want, or forcing the whole system to change algorithms to stop any unauthorized access?
Not to mention, there is no such a thing as "lost" Bitcoins, because once you lose access to your keys, there is no possible way to prove that you have lost the access to your keys, therefore, any perceived lost coins, could still have owners with access to the keys, they just are not interested to reveal it. Regardless, even if they are truly lost, they are not yours to take. Period.

Well, this is all clear))

I have this question for you.
Let's say I found a key that I use as point G.
Using this, I add 1 to my search key, and I also subtract 1 to my search key. As a result, I get the same public key, one is 03 and the other is 02.

Is it possible in this case to calculate the private key I am looking for?

As far as I remember, by changing point G, as a result, we no longer add and subtract, but divide and multiply our public key? Or I was mistaken. Just knowing this, it seems to me that you can calculate the difference.

[mabdlmonem]

I have found a few interesting hints regarding the puzzle 130, since I don't know the actual private key, I will just leave them here for the author to verify.
Are the following values related to the puzzle 130 in any way? Like being the last characters, first characters, the key being divisible by them etc?
3c8
f2
ec

If yes then I might be onto something. Then I'd need a hint to follow up on it, you might also want to check the inverse key as well.

I think that if the creator was to come here and give us hints, this would defeat the purpose of his creation which is to measure our cracking capabilities.

Can't really be giving out hints in an experiment like this one, we must check our own leads and see what comes out of it.

The beginning of private key  for 130 is 0x3

[alek76]

The beginning of private key  for 130 is 0x3

You are already stuck with your guesses! Stop spreading spam!

Added mod 013

https://github.com/alek76-2/VanitySearch/tree/main/mod/013

Added Path - m/0'/0'/66' For 32 BTC Puzzle

Use SSE2 instructions - default VanitySearch code / Disable SSE cmd: -nosse
Initial SEED extension to 64 bits
GPU Added rotation - #define NB_SPIN 16
Modification file GPUHash.h
The speed on the Tesla T4 GPU is 670.98 Mkeys/s
If Use GPU Rekey multiple by 1000

RUN CMD:

Code:

VanitySearch.exe -stop -nosse -verbose 1 -level 0 -t 1 -bits 66 -r 10 13zb1hQbWVsc2S7ZTZnP2G4undNNpdh5so

VanitySearch.exe -stop -t 0 -nosse -o Result.txt -verbose 1 -level 0 -gpu -r 500000000 -bits 66 13zb1hQbWVsc2S7ZTZnP2G4undNNpdh5so

Added play sound buzzer.wav in Windows version

p.s. The binaries assemble everything themselves.