Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22]

[Trillium]

i am just curious how things can get stuck in such a way in an open source environment.

Because vanity gen addresses are a minor niche of cryptocoins and people would rather use their hardware to mine and make profit.

[deepceleron]

I installed video driver Catalyst 13.8 beta and it seems to still be working with oclvanitygen on my HD5xxx, going from 11.11.

[eXclusiveOR]

I installed video driver Catalyst 13.8 beta and it seems to still be working with oclvanitygen on my HD5xxx, going from 11.11.

many posts so far have indicated that the problems are related to the actual hardware rather than to the driver, your post makes it +1  

[mmmerlin]

Anyone able to explain how someone was able to mine this address: 1111111111111111111114oLvT2

Seems to be crazy hard, that's 21 1's in a row!  

Fact check: https://blockchain.info/address/1111111111111111111114oLvT2

[Dabs]

Anyone able to explain how someone was able to mine this address: 1111111111111111111114oLvT2

Seems to be crazy hard, that's 21 1's in a row! 

Fact check: https://blockchain.info/address/1111111111111111111114oLvT2

That's not a "real" address.

Just like 1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE.

Nobody has the private keys for those two.

[mmmerlin]

Anyone able to explain how someone was able to mine this address: 1111111111111111111114oLvT2

Seems to be crazy hard, that's 21 1's in a row! 

Fact check: https://blockchain.info/address/1111111111111111111114oLvT2

That's not a "real" address.

Just like 1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE.

Nobody has the private keys for those two.

Thank you, a perfect explanation! (Though I do feel a bit silly now  )

[Trillium]

It's important to note that searching for short addresses (<34 standard character address length) by utilising "1"*n patterns has a greater difficulty than other patterns of the same length.

I have found several hundred 31 length addresses and a few (2 or 3) 30 character addresses running my 7950 at work over a many-month long period of time.

[mmmerlin]

It's important to note that searching for short addresses (<34 standard character address length) by utilising "1"*n patterns has a greater difficulty than other patterns of the same length.

I have found several hundred 31 length addresses and a few (2 or 3) 30 character addresses running my 7950 at work over a many-month long period of time.

Yeah, I hadn't factored in the extra difficulty from the fact it's all 1's / is such a short address, I was just messing around on FirstBits and was shocked to see that address in use!

[gadman2]

Is there a way to easily calculate the difficulty (without mining for it) through a web-app or what not?

[FanEagle]

oclvanitygen gives me an error while trying to use it:
"Error loading kernel file 'calc_addrs.cl': No such file or directory"
On a windows machine.

To be clear: both files, oclvanitygen and calc_addrs.cl are in the same folder

Edit: Run in administrator mode, error log

Compiling kernel, can take minutes...failure.
clBuildProgram: CL_BUILD_PROGRAM_FAILURE
Build log:
Error: Code selection failed to select: 04B3A1A0: i32 = bswap 04B3EC00

[bernard75]

Is there a way to easily calculate the difficulty (without mining for it) through a web-app or what not?

Is there? Or maybe data from experience for 5-7 char length?

[mmmerlin]

Is there a way to easily calculate the difficulty (without mining for it) through a web-app or what not?

Is there? Or maybe data from experience for 5-7 char length?

Well, it's obviously calculable (probalistically), so there's no need to do it from data.

The code to make this calculation has already been written and is included in VanityGen, so if you really want you could always pull that bit of the code out and make the app yourself... 

[gadman2]

Is there a way to easily calculate the difficulty (without mining for it) through a web-app or what not?

Is there? Or maybe data from experience for 5-7 char length?

Well, it's obviously calculable (probalistically), so there's no need to do it from data.

The code to make this calculation has already been written and is included in VanityGen, so if you really want you could always pull that bit of the code out and make the app yourself... 

I'm a newb Can anyone do this real quick and post the code?

[mmmerlin]

Is there a way to easily calculate the difficulty (without mining for it) through a web-app or what not?

Is there? Or maybe data from experience for 5-7 char length?

Well, it's obviously calculable (probalistically), so there's no need to do it from data.

The code to make this calculation has already been written and is included in VanityGen, so if you really want you could always pull that bit of the code out and make the app yourself... 

I'm a newb Can anyone do this real quick and post the code?

Lol, I don't know how "real quick" it would be, I've never looked at the code. You can always just run vanitygen with the expression as it runs that part of the code automatically and outputs the estimate. Can you just use this?

[Dabs]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 1
Difficulty: 1

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 12
Difficulty: 23
Pattern: 12

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123
Difficulty: 1353
Pattern: 123

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 1234
Difficulty: 78508
Pattern: 1234

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 12345
Difficulty: 4553521
[103.63 Kkey/s][total 399360][Prob 8.4%][50% in 26.6s]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123456
Difficulty: 264104224
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 38.3min]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 1234567
Difficulty: 15318045009
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 1.5d]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 12345678
Difficulty: 888446610538
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 89.6d]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123456789
Difficulty: 51529903411245
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 14.2y]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123456789o
Difficulty: 2988734397852220
[85.70 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 766.5y]

[mmmerlin]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 1
Difficulty: 1

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 12
Difficulty: 23
Pattern: 12

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123
Difficulty: 1353
Pattern: 123

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 1234
Difficulty: 78508
Pattern: 1234

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 12345
Difficulty: 4553521
[103.63 Kkey/s][total 399360][Prob 8.4%][50% in 26.6s]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123456
Difficulty: 264104224
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 38.3min]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 1234567
Difficulty: 15318045009
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 1.5d]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 12345678
Difficulty: 888446610538
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 89.6d]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123456789
Difficulty: 51529903411245
[79.58 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 14.2y]

H:\vanitygen>vanitygen -F compressed 123456789o
Difficulty: 2988734397852220
[85.70 Kkey/s][total 17408][Prob 0.0%][50% in 766.5y]

Yes, that's what I meant! 

[Dabs]

I just ran it. Obviously didn't finish the longer ones. My laptop is also slow as you can see, 100 Kkey/s.

Up to 1234 is almost instant. Longer prefixes take longer amounts of time. People who managed to get this working on their GPUs have faster times or less times needed to generate.

[ratty]

In case anyone works on this program again (it would be nice if it worked on modern cards again), I have a suggestion. Have it so you can put in a big list of strings and let it match on any of them. When I use oclvanityminer it appears to only grab 1 string from the list and just dial up addresses until it finds a match. But wouldn't it be better to just search for a lot of addresses at once? Or maybe that is not possible to do on a GPU?
I look at a page like this: https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork and think, why can't I just wardial addresses and look for them all at the same time?

[kjj]

If you are using vanitypool, each address request has an associated secret.  The people working don't have access to the secret, but it is a factor in the resulting address, so you can only look for one at a time.

[Trillium]

In case anyone works on this program again (it would be nice if it worked on modern cards again), I have a suggestion. Have it so you can put in a big list of strings and let it match on any of them. When I use oclvanityminer it appears to only grab 1 string from the list and just dial up addresses until it finds a match. But wouldn't it be better to just search for a lot of addresses at once? Or maybe that is not possible to do on a GPU?

oclvanitygen -D 0:2 -i -k -o foundMANY1111111111116234234661s.txt 1111111 1tri11ium 1heartofgold 1aaaaaaaaa 1bbbbbbbbb 1cccccccccc 1ddddddddd 1eeeeeeeee 1fffffffff 1ggggggggg 1hhhhhhhhh 1iiiiiiiii 1jjjjjjjjj 1kkkkkkkkk 1lllllllll 1mmmmmmmmm 1nnnnnnnnn 1ooooooooo 1ppppppppp 1qqqqqqqqq 1rrrrrrrrr 1sssssssss 1ttttttttt 1uuuuuuuuu 1vvvvvvvvv 1wwwwwwwww 1xxxxxxxxx 1yyyyyyyyy 1zzzzzzzzz 1222222222 1333333333 1444444444 1555555555 1666666666 1777777777 1888888888 1999999999 1000000000