Bitcoin Forum
December 03, 2016, 07:41:35 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 [116] 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22]  (Read 808139 times)
jrmg
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134


View Profile
July 24, 2015, 07:32:47 PM
 #2301

How I can make custom wallet address where I don't have privatekey but have choose long address like 1Bitcoineater address?
1480794095
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480794095

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480794095
Reply with quote  #2

1480794095
Report to moderator
1480794095
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480794095

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480794095
Reply with quote  #2

1480794095
Report to moderator
1480794095
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480794095

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480794095
Reply with quote  #2

1480794095
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480794095
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480794095

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480794095
Reply with quote  #2

1480794095
Report to moderator
TheRealSteve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686

FUN > ROI


View Profile
July 24, 2015, 07:43:06 PM
 #2302

How I can make custom wallet address where I don't have privatekey but have choose long address like 1Bitcoineater address?
You reverse the last few steps that are part of a regular address generation;
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Technical_background_of_version_1_Bitcoin_addresses
So you base58 decode your input, (1WhateverEtc), take the first section, double-sha256 that, take the first 4 bytes of that result as the CRC, and append that to your 1WhateverEtc.

There might be services that do this for you - if not, just run a bit of python code (can do that online, too): https://gist.github.com/CoinWhisperer/6d673f1f3d13da1611cd

In general, google 'bitcoin "burn address"' and then 'generator' or 'maker' or somesuch - bound to find more results Smiley

TrueBeliever
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 79


View Profile
July 25, 2015, 01:26:29 PM
 #2303

Yep, added - thanks Smiley

I also recently updated the Vanitygen article in general with some general info on pattern difficulty and any delusions of trying to use Vanitygen to attack addresses Smiley

I would like to say a gtx 780ti does 50-60Mkey/s highest was 62Mkey/s

just for documenting purposes.

which version is your card? I assume it is the faster 3GB RAM, DDR5, 384bit bus version?

██████████    YoBit.net - Cryptocurrency Exchange - Over 350 coins
█████████    <<  ● $$$ - $$$ - $$$ - $$$ - $$$ - $$$ - $$$   >>
██████████    <<  ● Play DICE! Win 1-5 btc just for 5 mins!  >>
ezeminer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756

Needs more cowbell.


View Profile
July 26, 2015, 04:53:35 PM
 #2304

Yep, added - thanks Smiley

I also recently updated the Vanitygen article in general with some general info on pattern difficulty and any delusions of trying to use Vanitygen to attack addresses Smiley

I would like to say a gtx 780ti does 50-60Mkey/s highest was 62Mkey/s

just for documenting purposes.

which version is your card? I assume it is the faster 3GB RAM, DDR5, 384bit bus version?

Yea
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487001

jacktheking
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


BitRevenues.com | Free Bitcoin Lottery


View Profile WWW
July 27, 2015, 03:48:09 AM
 #2305

Hey guys (and girls). I have been trying to use the keyconv utility as stated in first post. However, my machine dont seem to understand. When I run ./keyconv -G it gave me the following error.

Code:
Invalid character '-' in prefix './keyconv'
Code:
Invalid character 'G' in prefix '-G'

How can I fix it?

Edit: Found out that I dont have keyconv.exe installed. Not sure why. Downloaded the latest version and it's working now.

tspacepilot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


I will write code in exchange for bitcoins.


View Profile
July 27, 2015, 02:46:50 PM
 #2306

Hey guys (and girls). I have been trying to use the keyconv utility as stated in first post. However, my machine dont seem to understand. When I run ./keyconv -G it gave me the following error.

Code:
Invalid character '-' in prefix './keyconv'
Code:
Invalid character 'G' in prefix '-G'

How can I fix it?

Edit: Found out that I dont have keyconv.exe installed. Not sure why. Downloaded the latest version and it's working now.

Glad you figured it out.  For the record it's nicer if you can put the entire comand line (including your invocation, not just the error message).  I was looking at your error message thinking, there must be some syntax error in the command he wrote, but since I couldn't see the command you wrote ...

Not currently actively browsing this forum.  I do still respond to PMs though.
foodstamps
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
July 28, 2015, 04:40:50 PM
 #2307

So I can only get oclvanitygen to recognize 2 GPUs at a time on same rig....even if I have 5 connected. Is this normal?

Jude Austin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1000


The Real Jude Austin


View Profile
July 31, 2015, 11:11:37 PM
 #2308

So I can only get oclvanitygen to recognize 2 GPUs at a time on same rig....even if I have 5 connected. Is this normal?

Did you try using -D argument?

oclvanitygen64 -D 0:0 -D 0:1 -D 0:2 -D 0:3 -D 0:4 12manyGPUs

Nothing to see here...
bitcreditscc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 03:50:47 AM
 #2309

Been wondering how to go about creating a vanity multi-sig address anyone ever attempted ? Fail/Succeed?

TheRealSteve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686

FUN > ROI


View Profile
August 02, 2015, 11:57:56 AM
 #2310

Been wondering how to go about creating a vanity multi-sig address anyone ever attempted ? Fail/Succeed?
See this discussion for some pointers:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/202ka5/is_it_possible_to_make_a_vanity_multisig_address/

I'm pretty sure I've seen a multisig vanity out there used either by a pool or an exchange, but don't recall any details.

bitcreditscc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588



View Profile
August 02, 2015, 06:17:39 PM
 #2311

Been wondering how to go about creating a vanity multi-sig address anyone ever attempted ? Fail/Succeed?
See this discussion for some pointers:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/202ka5/is_it_possible_to_make_a_vanity_multisig_address/

I'm pretty sure I've seen a multisig vanity out there used either by a pool or an exchange, but don't recall any details.

great thanks!!!

tspacepilot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


I will write code in exchange for bitcoins.


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 09:16:11 PM
 #2312

I guess I finally noticed this paragraph on the wiki page for vanitygen:

Quote
As vanitygen performs a lot of large integer arithmetic, running it in 64-bit mode makes a huge difference in key search rate, easily a 50% improvement over 32-bit mode. If you are using a 64-bit edition of Windows, and not using a GPU, be sure to use vanitygen64.exe.
So that made me double-check and it turned out that my binary of vanitygen was:

Code:
tspacepilot@computer:~/src/vanitygen$ file vanitygen
vanitygen: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=36407df1ab36b5bef2906e418394ec750806c884, not stripped

Whoops!

So I rebuilt it and now Ihave a 64-bit executable and things are faster.  Okay, so I continue reading on the same page:

Quote
In custom builds, CPU performance will be less than expected if the OpenSSL library is an older version (<1.0.0d) or is not built with the appropriate optimizations enabled.


Well, I had built by just saying "make", so this makes me wonder what are the appropriate optimizations (are they Makefile options I should be passing?).  That's the point of this question then, should I just say "make" or should I be passing some kind of optimization parameters?

Not currently actively browsing this forum.  I do still respond to PMs though.
hexafraction
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308

Tips welcomed: 1CF4GhXX1RhCaGzWztgE1YZZUcSpoqTbsJ


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 09:36:40 PM
 #2313

I guess I finally noticed this paragraph on the wiki page for vanitygen:

Quote
As vanitygen performs a lot of large integer arithmetic, running it in 64-bit mode makes a huge difference in key search rate, easily a 50% improvement over 32-bit mode. If you are using a 64-bit edition of Windows, and not using a GPU, be sure to use vanitygen64.exe.
So that made me double-check and it turned out that my binary of vanitygen was:

Code:
tspacepilot@computer:~/src/vanitygen$ file vanitygen
vanitygen: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=36407df1ab36b5bef2906e418394ec750806c884, not stripped

Whoops!

So I rebuilt it and now Ihave a 64-bit executable and things are faster.  Okay, so I continue reading on the same page:

Quote
In custom builds, CPU performance will be less than expected if the OpenSSL library is an older version (<1.0.0d) or is not built with the appropriate optimizations enabled.


Well, I had built by just saying "make", so this makes me wonder what are the appropriate optimizations (are they Makefile options I should be passing?).  That's the point of this question then, should I just say "make" or should I be passing some kind of optimization parameters?

You might need to set CFLAGS and/or CXXFLAGS to include -O3 when running configure if you don't see -O3 in the command lines shown when running make. However, -O3 might be already set most likely. I'd need to double check.

~~~~
tspacepilot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


I will write code in exchange for bitcoins.


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 09:42:59 PM
 #2314

I guess I finally noticed this paragraph on the wiki page for vanitygen:

Quote
As vanitygen performs a lot of large integer arithmetic, running it in 64-bit mode makes a huge difference in key search rate, easily a 50% improvement over 32-bit mode. If you are using a 64-bit edition of Windows, and not using a GPU, be sure to use vanitygen64.exe.
So that made me double-check and it turned out that my binary of vanitygen was:

Code:
tspacepilot@computer:~/src/vanitygen$ file vanitygen
vanitygen: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=36407df1ab36b5bef2906e418394ec750806c884, not stripped

Whoops!

So I rebuilt it and now Ihave a 64-bit executable and things are faster.  Okay, so I continue reading on the same page:

Quote
In custom builds, CPU performance will be less than expected if the OpenSSL library is an older version (<1.0.0d) or is not built with the appropriate optimizations enabled.


Well, I had built by just saying "make", so this makes me wonder what are the appropriate optimizations (are they Makefile options I should be passing?).  That's the point of this question then, should I just say "make" or should I be passing some kind of optimization parameters?

You might need to set CFLAGS and/or CXXFLAGS to include -O3 when running configure if you don't see -O3 in the command lines shown when running make. However, -O3 might be already set most likely. I'd need to double check.

I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel?  I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another.  Please correct me if I'm wrong!

Not currently actively browsing this forum.  I do still respond to PMs though.
hexafraction
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308

Tips welcomed: 1CF4GhXX1RhCaGzWztgE1YZZUcSpoqTbsJ


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 09:52:42 PM
 #2315


I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel?  I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another.  Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

~~~~
tspacepilot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


I will write code in exchange for bitcoins.


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 10:14:18 PM
 #2316


I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel?  I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another.  Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

Thanks, I'll look at the Makefile that I downloaded from github and see what's going on in there with respect to CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.

EDIT:

This is the top of the default Makefile, looks like I'm okay if that's the only optimizations they're referring to in the wiki:

Code:
LIBS=-lpcre -lcrypto -lm -lpthread
CFLAGS=-ggdb -O3 -Wall

Not currently actively browsing this forum.  I do still respond to PMs though.
hexafraction
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308

Tips welcomed: 1CF4GhXX1RhCaGzWztgE1YZZUcSpoqTbsJ


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 10:21:46 PM
 #2317


I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel?  I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another.  Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

Thanks, I'll look at the Makefile that I downloaded from github and see what's going on in there with respect to CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.

EDIT:

This is the top of the default Makefile, looks like I'm okay if that's the only optimizations they're referring to in the wiki:

Code:
LIBS=-lpcre -lcrypto -lm -lpthread
CFLAGS=-ggdb -O3 -Wall

Yep, it looks like it's being fully optimized. I'm not sure why -ggdb is included; debug builds usually have poorer performance. -ggdb should be removed and the final executable tested.

~~~~
tspacepilot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232


I will write code in exchange for bitcoins.


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 10:26:32 PM
 #2318


I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel?  I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another.  Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

Thanks, I'll look at the Makefile that I downloaded from github and see what's going on in there with respect to CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.

EDIT:

This is the top of the default Makefile, looks like I'm okay if that's the only optimizations they're referring to in the wiki:

Code:
LIBS=-lpcre -lcrypto -lm -lpthread
CFLAGS=-ggdb -O3 -Wall

Yep, it looks like it's being fully optimized. I'm not sure why -ggdb is included; debug builds usually have poorer performance. -ggdb should be removed and the final executable tested.

Thanks for the tip, I'll remove the debugger flag and rebuild.  Cheers!

EDIT: that actually does appear to have made a small difference, but to be honest I think it's in the margin of error (10Kkeys/s or so) since I'm doing other things on this computer at the same time.

Not currently actively browsing this forum.  I do still respond to PMs though.
hexafraction
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308

Tips welcomed: 1CF4GhXX1RhCaGzWztgE1YZZUcSpoqTbsJ


View Profile
August 03, 2015, 10:33:23 PM
 #2319


I might be completely wrong here, but isn't the -O3 just going to build the program in parallel?  I guess I thought the wiki wasn't referring to optimizing the build process itself, but to optimizing the built binary for working on some harware or another.  Please correct me if I'm wrong!

No, that's -j2 (or some other number) passed to make. -O3 means optimization level 3 (highest performance). When you add it to CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS and then run ./configure, the makefile will contain -O3 for all compiler steps. Thus the compiler will be called with -O3 and thus every compilation unit/source file will be compiled with maximum optimizations.

Thanks, I'll look at the Makefile that I downloaded from github and see what's going on in there with respect to CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS.

EDIT:

This is the top of the default Makefile, looks like I'm okay if that's the only optimizations they're referring to in the wiki:

Code:
LIBS=-lpcre -lcrypto -lm -lpthread
CFLAGS=-ggdb -O3 -Wall

Yep, it looks like it's being fully optimized. I'm not sure why -ggdb is included; debug builds usually have poorer performance. -ggdb should be removed and the final executable tested.

Thanks for the tip, I'll remove the debugger flag and rebuild.  Cheers!

EDIT: that actually does appear to have made a small difference, but to be honest I think it's in the margin of error (10Kkeys/s or so) since I'm doing other things on this computer at the same time.

No problem, I'll do some testing myself. I don't have working OpenCL drivers so I'm forced to go CPU, so I'm always on the lookout for compile-time optimizations beyond the defaults for some CPU-intensive executables I use.

~~~~
ChetnotAtkins
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 131


View Profile
August 20, 2015, 01:42:52 PM
 #2320

Could anybody post the necessary code changes to allow oclvanitygen to generate compressed and uncompressed keys simultaneously? I suspect the speed increase must be substantial

Thanks!
Pages: « 1 ... 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 [116] 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!