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

[Timelord2067]

I can help you with this, but I need to know how the pub key is used in vanitygen.

Go back about four or five pages ... and read the flaming manual! (That and use the

Code:

/?

switch...

[shorena]

Can anyone help me creating 3 Vanity addresses starting with the following:

1. 123456
2. 111111
3. 111BTC

And here's my pubic key part:

Code:

04120ADFA86FA7C8B75956E5176184DEB0C85A3DB646EB4A9F09CE9A0D6EAAA7DCD155E4CB02AAC5987F8EBDFA230A59896F48C947B20F3550162204CE18AE66D7

Thanks in advance

BTW, are bitcoin addresses starting with numbers like this easily hack-able via brute force?

Great choice of Vanity addresses BTW, I have also generated some 6-character specific vanity addresses previously with the help shorena and Timelord2067. They might help you out too. Good Luck!

I can give it a try tonight yes.

[Duck_Duck]

I can help you with this, but I need to know how the pub key is used in vanitygen.

Go back about four or five pages ... and read the flaming manual! (That and use the

Code:

/?

switch...

I already read the help prompt from vanitygen and understand how split key generation works, but still didn't find how to use split key option on oclvanitygen.

[xdrpx]

Running Vanitygen64 generating a key starting with string 1Proto taking about 14 Hours at the rate of 650 Kkeys. I was finding for a tool like this, would be useful to generate some more and use it as a public address to receive bitcoins.

[n3rvi0zz0]

Really good the aplication i pointed 4 servers to the pool to help bit.

Now i have a question

1MPmZ99f52t8cYchJMcD19QqeZnwVo2S8v


I want to bruteforce this btc adress, I own already the private keys but i wanna do some test.

shall i introduce my btc address as pattern and wait for the solution?

Ignoring that it is no use to find a complete bitcoin adress. :-)

You can not put the whole bitcoin adress in vanitygen.
the adress is a base58 of a hash+checksum.
You will have unbase58; remove the checksum, then rebase58 and try and find that sequence.
When found, that checksum part will be regenerated by vanitygen when it presents the result.... in a couple of million years.

Edit:

I wanna create thousands of btc address with vanity but something give me a error

vanitygen 1 -ko test.log

what im doing wrong?

try:
vanitygen 1 -k -o test.log

As far as I know the flags cannot combined.

How we can scalate the efficiency of vanitygen i mind i can rent a supercomputer and put vanitygen to work (amazon cloud, google cloud etc)

if i put 10 grafic cards to work in the same motherboard all the power will be used by vanitygen?



why paterns as 111111 take longer than 1abc?


any chance to ad the rendezvous points to find more quickly the The Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)


thanks for your time

looking for a collision"!!!!!!

[shorena]

-snip-
How we can scalate the efficiency of vanitygen i mind i can rent a supercomputer and put vanitygen to work (amazon cloud, google cloud etc)

if i put 10 grafic cards to work in the same motherboard all the power will be used by vanitygen?

Same with highly parallel operations, you lose a little for the overhead with every device added. In general 1 GPU is faster than any CPU (probably even true for 18 core CPUs). 2 GPUs are faster than 1, but not truely twice as fast, 3 are faster than 2, but the 3rd does not add another 50% of power. etc. If you want to buy extra computing power for a vanity address by all means go ahead, but keep in mind that its expensive, probably more expensive than just letting your GPU(s) search for a week or two.

why paterns as 111111 take longer than 1abc?

The longer the patern that higher the difficulty. Your chance to find a fitting key a smaller if you ask for more symbols to match. Same as it takes longer (on average) to roll five 6's than it takes to roll one 6.

any chance to ad the rendezvous points to find more quickly the The Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA)

thanks for your time

looking for a collision"!!!!!!

Evil-Knievel?

[n3rvi0zz0]

OK i see really interesting the possibilities of vanitygen we just miss one thing a quantum computer.

we work with a really big numbers so the possibility of a collision is minimal.

I just wondering to know how long will take discover all the address with the 11L pattern.

with my equipment i just get 1.000.000 of address with the 11L in 4 hours but not sure about the maths.


For check the  balance of an address i found this in git

https://github.com/TheZ3ro/bitcoin-privkey-bruteforce

#!/usr/bin/env python
#TheZero
#This code is under Public Domain

import sys
import urllib2
import json
from threading import Thread
from time import sleep
threads = []
jackpot = []
addr=""
n=0

# http://bitcoin-abe.info/chain/Bitcoin/q/addressbalance/1AFhryVU44AEGt3WxWpaqbKVKPPcNk8BfC
# -direct integer response
# http://blockchain.info/address/1AFhryVU44AEGt3WxWpaqbKVKPPcNk8BfC?format=json
# -json_data["final_balance"]
# http://btc.blockr.io/api/v1/address/info/1AFhryVU44AEGt3WxWpaqbKVKPPcNk8BfC
# -json_data["data"]["balance"]
# http://webbtc.com/address/1AFhryVU44AEGt3WxWpaqbKVKPPcNk8BfC.json
# -json_data["balance"]
# https://mainnet.helloblock.io/v1/addresses/1AFhryVU44AEGt3WxWpaqbKVKPPcNk8BfC
# -json_data["data"]["address"]["balance"]

def scan(address,pkey):
   req = urllib2.Request("http://btc.blockr.io/api/v1/address/info/"+address+"")
   res = urllib2.urlopen(req)
   json_data = json.load(res)
   #print address+" "+pkey+" "+str(json_data["data"]["balance"])
   if json_data["data"]["balance"]>=0.01:
      print address+" "+pkey+" "+str(json_data["data"]["balance"])
      jackpot.append(address+" "+pkey+" "+str(json_data["data"]["balance"]))

if len(sys.argv)!=2:
   exit()

try:
   f = open(sys.argv[1], "r")
   try:
      # read all the lines into a list.
      lines = f.readlines()
   finally:
      f.close()
except IOError:
   pass

for line in lines:
   if line.startswith("Address: "):
      addr=line[9:-1]
   if line.startswith("Privkey: "):
      t = Thread(target=scan, args=(addr,line[9:]))
      threads.append(t)
      t.start()
      sleep(1)
      n+=1
      print str(n)+" "+str((n*3)-2)+" "+str(len(jackpot))

#[x.join() for x in threads]

if len(jackpot)>0:
   print "\n---------------------------\nYou WIN THIS JACKPOT! "+ str(len(jackpot))
   
try:
   # This tries to open an existing file but creates a new file if necessary.
   logfile = open("jackpot.txt", "a")
   try:
      for j in jackpot:
         logfile.write(j)
   finally:
      logfile.close()
except IOError:
   pass

I run in Debian and seems work but the output in the screen its just two files of numbers someone can "refine" this code with help me a lot my knowledge of python is 0 like the balance of cryptsy accounts


Just for fun the author says clearly its mathematically impossible another thing is find a vuln in ECDSA but seems a lot of work


thanks again

[shorena]

OK i see really interesting the possibilities of vanitygen we just miss one thing a quantum computer.

A quantum computer can not speed up vantiy address generation as its not efficient at sha256 or ripemd160 and thus can not calculate the private key from an address. A QC is not a very fast computer, it is capable of performing certain algorithms like shor's which is better at solving certain tasks. This does not magically enable it to do all calculations faster.

we work with a really big numbers so the possibility of a collision is minimal.

I just wondering to know how long will take discover all the address with the 11L pattern.

with my equipment i just get 1.000.000 of address with the 11L in 4 hours but not sure about the maths.
-snip-

Similar to mining you make no progress towards your goal. Vanitygen just randomly generates a private key, checks if it matches the pattern and keep it if it does. If not the key is not stored. Considering 1 million addresses per second and ideal storrage (32 byte per priv. key, no overhead) you have to store 2764800000000 byte or 2.5 TiB per day. Thus you cant check for doubles. Even if you could, knowing the result of one round does not bring you a step closer to the solution. To make sure you have all solutions you have to try all combinations. For bitcoin those are 2²⁵⁶ private keys for 2¹⁶⁰ possible addresses.

[tyz]

I solved the problem. This answer on Stackoverflow helped me out. The error resulted through missing dependencies software. I installed the prec with brew and everything went fine.

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/5697/osx-vanitygen-error-pattern-c3210-fatal-error-pcre-h-file-not-found

I downloaded the most recent version from github and tried to install it on my Mac. When I enter the folder and do a 'make' then I got the following error:

pattern.c:32:10: fatal error: 'pcre.h' file not found

Any suggestions?

[n3rvi0zz0]

OK i see really interesting the possibilities of vanitygen we just miss one thing a quantum computer.

A quantum computer can not speed up vantiy address generation as its not efficient at sha256 or ripemd160 and thus can not calculate the private key from an address. A QC is not a very fast computer, it is capable of performing certain algorithms like shor's which is better at solving certain tasks. This does not magically enable it to do all calculations faster.

we work with a really big numbers so the possibility of a collision is minimal.

I just wondering to know how long will take discover all the address with the 11L pattern.

with my equipment i just get 1.000.000 of address with the 11L in 4 hours but not sure about the maths.
-snip-

Similar to mining you make no progress towards your goal. Vanitygen just randomly generates a private key, checks if it matches the pattern and keep it if it does. If not the key is not stored. Considering 1 million addresses per second and ideal storrage (32 byte per priv. key, no overhead) you have to store 2764800000000 byte or 2.5 TiB per day. Thus you cant check for doubles. Even if you could, knowing the result of one round does not bring you a step closer to the solution. To make sure you have all solutions you have to try all combinations. For bitcoin those are 2²⁵⁶ private keys for 2¹⁶⁰ possible addresses.

then if a quantum computer, does not help solve the fastest hashes, the only option would be to find a weakness in the elliptic curve generated by the EDCSA is that correct? But from what I've read about this algorithm, it uses a random value generated by k, but random really. Also I have to say I read about a weakness that affects wallets that are generated in Java, it is not impossible, but from what little I've read still relies on very robust protocols


Thanks again for your time, I just want to understand a bit more all related to btc

[shorena]

-snip-
then if a quantum computer, does not help solve the fastest hashes, the only option would be to find a weakness in the elliptic curve generated by the EDCSA is that correct?

Shor's algorithm is good at finding the private key for a given public key. The addresses bitcoin uses however have an extra layer of protection until they are used for the first time, this layer are the different hashes. A quantum computer would be dangerour development for all eliptic curve crypto used, not only for crypto currencies like bitcoin.

But from what I've read about this algorithm, it uses a random value generated by k, but random really.

No k must not be random, its just important that its not reused. Its possible to use non random k values to limit the chances of a reusing k. Reusing k leaks the private key. This is an implementation weakness.

Also I have to say I read about a weakness that affects wallets that are generated in Java, it is not impossible, but from what little I've read still relies on very robust protocols

Yes, but thats an implementation weakness as well, not one of eliptic curves. It also does not help to find addresses. The weakness is based on a bad random number generator. If you only use 2³² different combinations its much more likely to run into collisions. Its like playing with a broken dice that gives certain numbers a higher chance. As such these number will come more often. It does not make dices in general broken.

Thanks again for your time, I just want to understand a bit more all related to btc

Maybe the following can help
video -> https://media.ccc.de/v/31c3_-_6369_-_en_-_saal_1_-_201412272145_-_ecchacks_-_djb_-_tanja_lange#video
slides -> https://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/Fahrplan/system/attachments/2501/original/20141227.pdf

It might also be better to discuss this in a different thread as we are drifting away from vanity address generation quickly.

[Decoded]

Why is generating a vanity address so hard... It's basically bitcoin mining after you get past a certain amount of set characters...

[Mercado]

Why is generating a vanity address so hard... It's basically bitcoin mining after you get past a certain amount of set characters...

Bitcoin mining is not hard either, it all depends on the difficulty. The bigger the set of chars in a vanity address, the bigger the difficulty

[Timelord2067]

Why is generating a vanity address so hard... It's basically bitcoin mining after you get past a certain amount of set characters...

Bitcoin mining is not hard either, it all depends on the difficulty. The bigger the set of chars in a vanity address, the bigger the difficulty

It's not exponentially harder, it's linear in that it takes 60 times longer for each additional number or letter.

Try using the non case sensitive switch for faster results.

[kingaltcoins]

Can a bitcoin address having same digit throughout, (like : 1111111111111111111111111111111) be easily hacked? BTW, there is a major disadvantage of vanity address gen, i,e. someone might create an address starting with "1Satoshi", exchange his fiat currency worth 50 BTC, store it in that address and try to claim himself as Satoshi! Just saying.

[shorena]

Can a bitcoin address having same digit throughout, (like : 1111111111111111111111111111111) be easily hacked?

Nope. Last 4 would not match anyway.

BTW, there is a major disadvantage of vanity address gen, i,e. someone might create an address starting with "1Satoshi", exchange his fiat currency worth 50 BTC, store it in that address and try to claim himself as Satoshi! Just saying.

I would say that is a major disadvantage of people that are easily convinced. Satoshis addresses are very old, adding 50 btc in 2015 should not convince anyone, no matter what vanity address you generate.

[tspacepilot]

Can a bitcoin address having same digit throughout, (like : 1111111111111111111111111111111) be easily hacked?

Nope. Last 4 would not match anyway.

It does seem like, in principle, it's possible that the checksum part of an address could be the same character repeated.  As for that character being the same as the rest of the address, I guess you've only 58 such address to check out, the 1s, the 2s, the 3s, ... the zs.

[shorena]

Can a bitcoin address having same digit throughout, (like : 1111111111111111111111111111111) be easily hacked?

Nope. Last 4 would not match anyway.

It does seem like, in principle, it's possible that the checksum part of an address could be the same character repeated.  As for that character being the same as the rest of the address, I guess you've only 58 such address to check out, the 1s, the 2s, the 3s, ... the zs.

Hmm, I cant do it right now for some reason, but it should not be possible. 1 is the 0 in base58 as bitcoin uses it. So you are essentially looking for a pubkey with ripemd160(sha256(pubkey)) = 0. That might be possible, but in order for the check sum to also be 0 you need the first 4 bytes of sha256(sha256(0)) to be 0 as well. Tried to create a valid address with some online tools[1][2], but somehow its not spitting out what I think it should. So maybe I miss something.

[1] http://lenschulwitz.com/base58
[2] http://www.xorbin.com/tools/sha256-hash-calculator

[tspacepilot]

Can a bitcoin address having same digit throughout, (like : 1111111111111111111111111111111) be easily hacked?

Nope. Last 4 would not match anyway.

It does seem like, in principle, it's possible that the checksum part of an address could be the same character repeated.  As for that character being the same as the rest of the address, I guess you've only 58 such address to check out, the 1s, the 2s, the 3s, ... the zs.

Hmm, I cant do it right now for some reason, but it should not be possible. 1 is the 0 in base58 as bitcoin uses it. So you are essentially looking for a pubkey with ripemd160(sha256(pubkey)) = 0. That might be possible, but in order for the check sum to also be 0 you need the first 4 bytes of sha256(sha256(0)) to be 0 as well. Tried to create a valid address with some online tools[1][2], but somehow its not spitting out what I think it should. So maybe I miss something.

[1] http://lenschulwitz.com/base58
[2] http://www.xorbin.com/tools/sha256-hash-calculator

Or = 2222, or equals 3333, etc, right?  Anyway, it'd be a funny address if you found such a thing.  Maybe it'd make the hall of fame, i dunno.

[shorena]

Can a bitcoin address having same digit throughout, (like : 1111111111111111111111111111111) be easily hacked?

Nope. Last 4 would not match anyway.

It does seem like, in principle, it's possible that the checksum part of an address could be the same character repeated.  As for that character being the same as the rest of the address, I guess you've only 58 such address to check out, the 1s, the 2s, the 3s, ... the zs.

Hmm, I cant do it right now for some reason, but it should not be possible. 1 is the 0 in base58 as bitcoin uses it. So you are essentially looking for a pubkey with ripemd160(sha256(pubkey)) = 0. That might be possible, but in order for the check sum to also be 0 you need the first 4 bytes of sha256(sha256(0)) to be 0 as well. Tried to create a valid address with some online tools[1][2], but somehow its not spitting out what I think it should. So maybe I miss something.

[1] http://lenschulwitz.com/base58
[2] http://www.xorbin.com/tools/sha256-hash-calculator

Or = 2222, or equals 3333, etc, right?  Anyway, it'd be a funny address if you found such a thing.  Maybe it'd make the hall of fame, i dunno.

Oh, now I get it. Yes, that might be possible. Well, finding the pubkey probably not while the sun is still burning. It might however be possible to find a µ where all its base58 symbols are the same and sha256(sha256(µ)) = µ(+)some rest no one cares about.