Bitcoin Forum
September 27, 2024, 07:28:10 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 [311]
  Print  
Author Topic: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it  (Read 212358 times)
karrask
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3
Merit: 0


View Profile
Today at 03:13:08 PM
 #6201

Good afternoon, friends. I have one question - in which programming language is there the fastest algorithm for obtaining a non-compression public key from a hexadecimal value? Can someone share it? it is needed for speed like kangaroo or keyhant. exactly, only obtaining a non-compression public key without any other functions. and yet - any interval can be reduced by 20-30%, perhaps more, I have succeeded so far.

There is no programming language on planet Earth or trick that can drastically speed up Bitcoin key generation or hashing (SHA-256, RIPEMD-160) .
Any perceived speed improvements, like in kangaroo or KeyHunt, come from optimization techniques for specific tasks, not from changing the core cryptographic functions.
Reducing the search interval (as mentioned above) can help focus efforts, but it doesn't change the time it takes to compute each key or hash.
Using multiple threads or GPUs (parallelization) can improve the throughput of key generation but not the speed of individual computations. In short, at least 600 GPUs are required.
I don't need no SHA-256, no RIPEMD-160. what is needed is an optimized algorithm that works with non-compression public keys.

No... What is needed is massive computational power or quantum computers. Everything else at this point is wasting time and electricity.
What does that have to do with it? I asked if there is an algorithm that is comparable in speed to kangaroo or keyhant
nomachine
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 23


View Profile
Today at 03:13:42 PM
Last edit: Today at 03:40:44 PM by nomachine
 #6202

I don't need no SHA-256, no RIPEMD-160. what is needed is an optimized algorithm that works with non-compression public keys.

The fastest approach to this is not tied to a specific programming language but rather to how well ECC scalar multiplication is optimized. Libraries such as secp256k1 in C or Rust's secp256k1 crate are already highly optimized for this task.

bc1qdwnxr7s08xwelpjy3cc52rrxg63xsmagv50fa8
Akito S. M. Hosana
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 65
Merit: 1


View Profile
Today at 03:35:40 PM
 #6203

No major shortcuts exist for ECC due to the huge math involved.  Sad
COBRAS
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 975
Merit: 22


View Profile
Today at 03:46:25 PM
 #6204

I don't need no SHA-256, no RIPEMD-160. what is needed is an optimized algorithm that works with non-compression public keys.

The fastest approach to this is not tied to a specific programming language but rather to how well ECC scalar multiplication is optimized. Libraries such as secp256k1 in C or Rust's secp256k1 crate are already highly optimized for this task.


Rng generators is more faster then simple range brute or kangaroo range brute. Kangaroo not provide result with 100% garanty, why people continue use and talk about kangaroo. I think kangaroo and  bsgs not specialisation on crack, for ex they not provide option for replace base point, replace scale of range etc

[
nomachine
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 23


View Profile
Today at 04:35:45 PM
 #6205

I don't need no SHA-256, no RIPEMD-160. what is needed is an optimized algorithm that works with non-compression public keys.

The fastest approach to this is not tied to a specific programming language but rather to how well ECC scalar multiplication is optimized. Libraries such as secp256k1 in C or Rust's secp256k1 crate are already highly optimized for this task.


Rng generators is more faster then simple range brute or kangaroo range brute. Kangaroo not provide result with 100% garanty, why people continue use and talk about kangaroo. I think kangaroo and  bsgs not specialisation on crack, for ex they not provide option for replace base point, replace scale of range etc

Brute force is like rolling a dice repeatedly at high speed, hoping to land on a specific number. Each roll is random, and you have no control over the outcome, so you're essentially relying on sheer luck. The faster you roll the dice, the quicker you can try different possibilities.

Bitcoin key generation, on the other hand, is more like playing a game of Craps. The game consists of multiple stages which slow down the whole process of winning: you first roll the dice to establish a target (this represents the key generation). After that, you roll again in the hopes of matching or getting closer to the target. In both cases, there's an element of randomness and strategy, but instead of relying purely on luck, Bitcoin generation involves cryptographic rules that govern each stage, making it a complex and structured process which reduce the attacks to zero..

bc1qdwnxr7s08xwelpjy3cc52rrxg63xsmagv50fa8
COBRAS
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 975
Merit: 22


View Profile
Today at 04:43:37 PM
Last edit: Today at 04:54:06 PM by COBRAS
 #6206

@nomachine privkey of btc is a geometric progression. they have only summ of ^ , 2^10+2^12+2^30 etc. Random generation of 2^10 to 2^130 has 130 parts(because "^" part only from 1 to 130 fkr 130 puzzke) of puzzle or range, everyone can select what hi like more range or puzzle. And if thant ^40 in result remove1..40 first parts of puzzle

[
nomachine
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 23


View Profile
Today at 05:23:13 PM
 #6207

I don’t know what I missed. I tried everything imaginable.  I now have a collection of 150 useless scripts, all aimed at cracking this puzzle. From polynomial regression to geometric progressions, there is no discernible pattern here. . I even spent seven whole months targeting the last eighteen characters of the WIF, attempting to reconstruct the private key. Regardless of which method you choose, without knowing the public key, this is unsolvable. At best, it could be solved in thousands of years. The numbers involved are astronomical—comparable to the size of the entire universe. It would take advanced quantum computing, and even then, only an exceptionally powerful one, to crack this puzzles without  the public key.

bc1qdwnxr7s08xwelpjy3cc52rrxg63xsmagv50fa8
kTimesG
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 171
Merit: 27


View Profile
Today at 07:01:37 PM
 #6208

because "^" part only from 1 to 130

Oh, COBRAS broke the square root bound! We only have 130 parts in a 130-bit puzzle, guess no one figured this out. Let's now reduce the range from 130 to 32, because why not. Maybe divide everything by zero (n) and call it a day? I'd say the magic astrological chart would work better though. But in base 112. Add parity to each letter in the puzzle addresses and solve using bubble sort. Spin the wheel until we reduce the checksums to zero, than split circle in 256. Convert each digit from cartesian to polar and compute corresponding point on the curve. Make lattice from points, to compute correct font size to use. Unspin, rejoin, set font size, get all keys. There, ECDLP solved.
Pages: « 1 ... 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 [311]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!