Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it

[kTimesG]

For all those who develop their own bots here are the main mistakes to avoid.

- Don't start your first transactions from a fixed fee.
- Don't increment a fixed amount.

To solve previous points you need to read what is the current fee in sat/vB and increment from that point, network only will accept transactions if those are +1 Sat/vB from previous know transactions.

Learn how to calculate your transaction size and set your fee multiplier this must done to try to maximize your possibilities to be accepted in mempool, without the need of burn all the fee.

What if the transactions have less or more inputs/outputs?
Let's say first TX has 900 bytes and some fee.
Would another transaction of 300 bytes, with less inputs, but a larger fee/byte, and so a smaller total fee, be accepted and replace the first TX?...

What if the first TX has input X among several inputs, and another TX only has X as input? What would the miners choose? It doesn't sound like an easy to solve problem.

[GR Sasa]

Is anyone else concerned about digaran? Do you think he gave up Bitcointalk forum or just still active from different accounts?

He was last active on 20 January, 2024.

He was most active on this particular thread.

[cnk1220]

You can have your own mempool on your home machine. No one can block you in localhost. You can only DDoS ​​Clearnet and Tor network.

I've already tweaked the number of connections a node can make. 

So you've setup your own Bitcoin node, have 5 computers, are worried about how many seconds of advantage you have and how many IPs to use to not get blocked, use your own mempool, and after all of this struggle you still invoke some 3rd party process to create and send your faith-based bumped-up TX consisting of a few hundred bytes? Jesus.

At least my excuse was that I was out of electricity last night. Bot was running for days. Bad luck.

No one needs some gigantic setup to run a bot. 400 lines of Python and a working kangaroo binary is enough.

Good.
My script is wrong, it's returning "balance error".

My setup it's just my keyhunt on WSL, and my python loopping.. I'll fix that up and made some tests...

[rukkamind]

My bot found the key and I send 3 Transactions all accepted by mempool, but they weren't mined.

Hello everybody. In 2019, I create my firt btc_miner, in python and C and bitcoincore (personal project).
With my RTX-3080 i got 1.3 GHhash/s not bad
some code to select transactions in pool.

Code:

try:
      pc_connection = AuthServiceProxy(serverURL)
      mempool = rpc_connection.getrawmempool(True)
      alltxs = [(txid, tx['fees'], tx['unbroadcast'],tx['bip125-replaceable']) for txid, tx in mempool.items()]
      alltxs_sorted = sorted(alltxs, key=lambda x: x[1]['modified'], reverse=False)

except Exception as e:
time.sleep(10)
continue

# how many transactions i want (random)
nx = random.randint(3000, 5000)
tokens = alltxs_sorted[:nx]

txhashes = []
txs_hex  = []

# fees
fees = 0
ntx1  = 0
pos_tx  = 0

for txs in tokens:
pos_tx += 1
tx_hash = txs[0]
brod = txs[2]
taxa = txs[1]['modified']
repl = txs[3]
if brod == False:
try:
raw_tx = rpc_connection.getrawtransaction(tx_hash)
if repl == False and ntx1 < 4500:
   ....

I decide in my code 250~500 transactions with better fees and  ~2500 with small fees and get ~4000transactions and try mine block. I think lucky your transaction faill

[albert0bsd]

Is anyone else concerned about digaran?

TBH no, I think he is using another account, what you can expected from a troll.

I decide in my code 250~500 transactions with better fees and  ~2500 with small fees and get ~4000transactions and try mine block. I think lucky your transaction faill

Nice to know, What you mean with " I think lucky your transaction faill" ? BTW edit your post and quote it correctly.

[cnk1220]

My bot found the key and I send 3 Transactions all accepted by mempool, but they weren't mined.

Hello everybody. In 2019, I create my firt btc_miner, in python and C and bitcoincore (personal project).
With my RTX-3080 i got 1.3 GHhash/s not bad
some code to select transactions in pool.

Code:

try:
      pc_connection = AuthServiceProxy(serverURL)
      mempool = rpc_connection.getrawmempool(True)
      alltxs = [(txid, tx['fees'], tx['unbroadcast'],tx['bip125-replaceable']) for txid, tx in mempool.items()]
      alltxs_sorted = sorted(alltxs, key=lambda x: x[1]['modified'], reverse=False)

except Exception as e:
time.sleep(10)
continue

# how many transactions i want (random)
nx = random.randint(3000, 5000)
tokens = alltxs_sorted[:nx]



txhashes = []
txs_hex  = []

# fees
fees = 0
ntx1  = 0
pos_tx  = 0

for txs in tokens:
pos_tx += 1
tx_hash = txs[0]
brod = txs[2]
taxa = txs[1]['modified']
repl = txs[3]
if brod == False:
try:
raw_tx = rpc_connection.getrawtransaction(tx_hash)
if repl == False and ntx1 < 4500:
   ....

I decide in my code 250~500 transactions with better fees and  ~2500 with small fees and get ~4000transactions and try mine block. I think lucky your transaction faill

Did you or did Alberto make the btc_miner?

[rukkamind]

I decide in my code 250~500 transactions with better fees and  ~2500 with small fees and get ~4000transactions and try mine block. I think lucky your transaction faill

Nice to know, What you mean with " I think lucky your transaction faill" ? BTW edit your post and quote it correctly.

I’ll try to explain better.
In my btc_miner, using Bitcoin Core and an RPC connection, I have access to all unverified transactions.
In this mempool, for example, I have 15,000 transactions. It’s impossible to include all of them in the block for mining.
I have limited space, so I typically choose between 3,000 to 5,000 transactions to be included in the block.
To make it profitable, I select transactions with higher fees first and then add those with lower fees to the block.
Once the transactions are defined, along with the Merkle tree and the previous block hash, I attempt to find the nonce.
The goal is to find a SHA-256 double hash with 19 leading zeros within the 2^32 possible nonce values.
If a valid nonce isn’t found, the process restarts. The miner who discovers the nonce and submits it first wins.
Unfortunately, after 5 months, I haven’t been able to mine any block. I only have 3 RTX 3080 GPUs; I don’t have an ASIC machine.
Therefore, Alberto, it’s possible that the miner didn’t choose your transaction, even if it had a higher fee.

[citb0in]

The goal is to find a SHA-256 double hash with 19 leading zeros within the 2^32 possible nonce values.
...
Unfortunately, after 5 months, I haven’t been able to mine any block. I only have 3 RTX 3080 GPUs; I don’t have an ASIC machine.

Wow, with 19 leading zeros, you're practically searching for a needle in a haystack while blindfolded, and the haystack is on another planet! You might have better luck finding a unicorn riding a rainbow. But hey, at least your RTX 3080s are getting a great workout—they’re practically bodybuilders in the world of GPUs now 

[albert0bsd]

About the minig class theory you can omit it, it is well documented:

https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/blob/develop/ch12_mining.adoc

Block size is 1MB, Merkle trees, Block header etc... all is there.

Therefore, Alberto, it’s possible that the miner didn’t choose your transaction, even if it had a higher fee.

Yes I know that that depends of how often miners update their mining block template, also depends of miner Node policies to acept or not Full RBF as I said before that is outside of our control.

[ColoradoFreedom]

Hey everyone - is there a general idea of what puzzles are not susceptible to the RBF bot stealers? I suppose the limiting factor would be how fast someone can get the private key with Kangaroo. What puzzles would reasonably be considered "safe" - 101? 131? Is it even worth pursuing any puzzle under 100 at this point?

[averagetoaster]

I remember reading some pages back someone suggesting that anything above 90 is safe from bots instantly stealing your private key.
You can experiment yourself with #70, #75, etc and see how long it takes on your hardware, and based on how good it is, account for people who have a lot of hardware more powerful than yours.

[Poopari]

Hi guyz, I am wondering if there is any python version of BSGS or Kangaroo algorithm. If someone knows it please suggest a link to it. Thanks.

[lordfrs]

Hi guyz, I am wondering if there is any python version of BSGS or Kangaroo algorithm. If someone knows it please suggest a link to it. Thanks.

https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

[rukkamind]

...
Did you or did Alberto make the btc_miner?

it's mine, my personal project not Alberto
https://i.postimg.cc/Czj6y4gQ/rukka.png

[kTimesG]

Hi guyz, I am wondering if there is any python version of BSGS or Kangaroo algorithm. If someone knows it please suggest a link to it. Thanks.

https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

65-bit, after 5 minutes I killed it, or else it's just a lost day.

Is this like a biggest dick competition, to randomly put stuff like "Tera" or "Exa" in front of the "keys/s", even though that would only be possible if running on a machine with thousands of TERA-hertz processor?

I will add "QuettaKeys/s" in my code.

Code:

python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b
[+] Starting CPU Kangaroo.... Please Wait     Version [ 15112021 ]
[+] Search Mode: Range search Continuous in the given range
[+] Working on Pubkey: 0430210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1be383c4a8ed4fac77c0d2ad737d8499a362f483f8fe39d1e86aaed578a9455dfc
[+] Using  [Number of CPU Threads: 19] [DP size: 10] [MaxStep: 2]
[+] Scanning Range           0x10000000000000000 : 0x100ffffffffffffff
[+] Scanning Range           0x10100000000000000 : 0x101ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 92.8MB/45.5MB]   
[+] Scanning Range           0x10200000000000000 : 0x102ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 94.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10300000000000000 : 0x103ffffffffffffffs][Dead 2][RAM 98.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10400000000000000 : 0x104ffffffffffffffs][Dead 6][RAM 91.7MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10500000000000000 : 0x105ffffffffffffffs][Dead 1][RAM 91.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10600000000000000 : 0x106ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10700000000000000 : 0x107ffffffffffffffs][Dead 5][RAM 91.1MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10800000000000000 : 0x108ffffffffffffffs][Dead 4][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] [10981.32 TeraKeys/s][Kang 19456][Count 2^29.53/2^29.09][Elapsed 16s][Dead 1][RAM 62.1MB/45.5MB]  ^C

[Feron]

this speed is fake real speed for Iceland library public key is 200k keys/second sequentially depends on processor
You can write whatever speed you want there xd

[rukkamind]

https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

Code:

python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b

From Iceland: https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

You haven't "keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff" and you haven't also "-p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b"

In python, main function:
run_puzzle(48, '0291bee5cf4b14c291c650732faa166040e4c18a14731f9a930c1e87d3ec12debb', dp=8, herd_size=1024)

I can uderstand, maybe, you put this on main function
run_puzzle(65, '0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b', dp=8, herd_size=1024)
result:
...
Ops: 131672064 Table size: 514265 Speed: 167818 ops/s
...
not Scanning Range like you write

Maybe I don't have your version or maybe you use bsgs from iceland
if you use that bsgs version:
python bsgs_dll_search.py -b bpfile.bin -bl bloomfile.bin -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff
If you do that, than you got:
============== KEYFOUND ==============
BSGS FOUND PrivateKey  0x1a838b13505b26867
======================================
Search Finished. All pubkeys Found !

[kTimesG]

https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

Code:

python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b

From Iceland: https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

You haven't "keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff" and you haven't also "-p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b"

In python, main function:
run_puzzle(48, '0291bee5cf4b14c291c650732faa166040e4c18a14731f9a930c1e87d3ec12debb', dp=8, herd_size=1024)

I can uderstand, maybe, you put this on main function
run_puzzle(65, '0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b', dp=8, herd_size=1024)
result:
...
Ops: 131672064 Table size: 514265 Speed: 167818 ops/s
...
not Scanning Range like you write

Maybe I don't have your version or maybe you use bsgs from iceland
if you use that bsgs version:
python bsgs_dll_search.py -b bpfile.bin -bl bloomfile.bin -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff
If you do that, than you got:
============== KEYFOUND ==============
BSGS FOUND PrivateKey  0x1a838b13505b26867
======================================
Search Finished. All pubkeys Found !

You are comparing apples with oranges. My script is a pure-Python, zero libraries, self-contained Kangaroo. Which means it trades performance with simplicity.

Not a wrapper script linking to natively compiled black-box libraries, which should run somewhere around 50 times faster on a CPU. If iceland's kangaroo native lib really does just 200k ops/s than it is funny that a pure Python example runs faster than his black-box lib, right? A native lib should dance with flying bells and whistles well above a few good million ops/s, even when instrumented from a Python wrapper. And when I see stuff like "10.000 TeraKeys/s" it just adds a serious question mark about what is going on. You can never trust something that shows a speed millions of times higher than your CPU's core running frequency.

DO NOT USE MY SCRIPT TO SEARCH FOR PUZZLES, you are wasting your time. It is just a reference implementation, not a fast implementation

[nomachine]

Is this like a biggest dick competition, to randomly put stuff like "Tera" or "Exa" in front of the "keys/s", even though that would only be possible if running on a machine with thousands of TERA-hertz processor?

I will add "QuettaKeys/s" in my code.

Why stop at 'QuettaKeys/s'? Let’s dream even bigger! How about 'UnicornKeys/s' or 'RainbowKeys/s'? With a sprinkle of fairy dust and a dash of imagination, your code will be the talk of the magical kingdom.  

[rukkamind]

Not a wrapper script linking to natively compiled black-box libraries, which should run somewhere around 50 times faster on a CPU. If iceland's kangaroo native lib really does just 200k ops/s than it is funny that a pure Python example runs faster than his black-box lib, right? A native lib should dance with flying bells and whistles well above a few good million ops/s, even when instrumented from a Python wrapper. And when I see stuff like "10.000 TeraKeys/s" it just adds a serious question mark about what is going on. You can never trust something that shows a speed millions of times higher than your CPU's core running frequency.

I also have my scripts completely done by me.
I agree with you, not using natively compiled libraries.
I’ll even give you an example: regarding sha256, I didn’t use any libraries, unlike the scripts I found so far.
I can say that the implementation of sha256d in C+CUDA C made my miner much faster.