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

[LoyceV]

Can i ask only about one thing - is it safe or not? I mean do the private key is safe and only i can see it or...?

Vanitygen is as safe as your own computer is. If your computer is compromised, so is your key.
To go full paranoid, you can generate a random Bitcoin address offline, from a Linux LIVE CD, and use split key to generate a vanity address. Full instructions:

Step 1: Goto https://www.bitaddress.org/ move your mouse/type in the field until it shows 100% and wait a second.
Step 1.5: Download the page, verify the download and run it locally^*.
Step 2: Click Vanity Wallet click the Generate button next to Generate your "Step1 Key Pair"
Step 3: Save the private key somewhere safe. You will need it later when I generated your partial private key.
Step 4: Once you create your partial private key on your online computer, go back to bitaddress.org and click on Vanity Wallet.
Step 5: Go to step 2 Calculate your vanity wallet. In the first field put the private key you saved and in the second field put the partial private key I gave you. Click Add and Calculate Vanity Wallet
Step 6: Copy the Vanity Private Key (WIF) and import it into your preferred wallet.
Credits to shorena for most of these instructions!
If something doesn't work as expected, have a look at this example.

_{(my own quote slightly edited to fit this post)}

[Quetzalchel]

Hi all!

I am trying to find rather long prefix (more than 8 symbols). I calculated estimated time as about 2 month with 8x1080.

But there is problem: oclvanitygen hangs after some working time (on Linux or Windows host). I had to write script which kills hanged process and restarts it.

So, there is no continuous running of oclvanytigen, and I am not sure that now I will find my prefix during expected 2 month.

Could someone tell me if there is mathematic difference between next two actions:
1) I run continuously without stopping oclvanitygen until it find my prefix (max 60 days, if I totally unlucky)
2) I run oclvanitygen for 1 hour, then kill process and start again - in cycle same 60 days.

Thank you!

[LoyceV]

Could someone tell me if there is mathematic difference between next two actions:
1) I run continuously without stopping oclvanitygen until it find my prefix (max 60 days, if I totally unlucky)
2) I run oclvanitygen for 1 hour, then kill process and start again - in cycle same 60 days.

There is no difference. There's also no "maximum" of 60 days, there's only the probability (say 50% chance to find it in 60 days).
For long searches like that, I use these options:

Code:

-i -k

This gives you at least some output (case insensitive) once in a while.

If you're running searches for months, you may want to make a longer list of words to search for. By making a list with prefixes you may find more cool addresses in the same amount of time.

[RentGPU]

How can i change the random number generation in the code , i want to move step by step +1 from a certain base point not +random number , is it something easy to do?!

[aarons6]

How can i change the random number generation in the code , i want to move step by step +1 from a certain base point not +random number , is it something easy to do?!

you could probably change the source code to do this, but realistically you would probably never find a match this way as you would systematically be hitting non matches forever instead of random checking for a match..

[arulbero]

How can i change the random number generation in the code , i want to move step by step +1 from a certain base point not +random number , is it something easy to do?!

you could probably change the source code to do this, but realistically you would probably never find a match this way as you would systematically be hitting non matches forever instead of random checking for a match..

I think that there is no difference, same odds.

There are software that work "step by step +1" but are not "vanitygen". Search for "brainflayer". The "+1" method is the faster way to generate public keys (and then addresses).

[Quetzalchel]

There is no difference. There's also no "maximum" of 60 days, there's only the probability (say 50% chance to find it in 60 days).
...
By making a list with prefixes you may find more cool addresses in the same amount of time.

Thank you for your answer, but I still have questions:
1) Why there is no difference? If you start every hour from some random seed, there is probability that you could start from the same wrong seed which you already checked earlier.
2) Why there is no "maximum"? What is "difficulty" mean then? I thought that "difficulty" is all possibly variants, and if I check every one of them I would find my prefix with 100% probability. And difference is only how soon I would find it - with very bad luck my prefix could be just last.
So, my statement is:
Maximum Time for prefix finding (with guaranteed result) = Difficulty / Speed
For example, with speed 1000000 keys/second I'll find prefix with 264104224 difficulty with 100% probability for maximum of 264104224/1000000=264 seconds
3) Thank you for wise advice, but I only need 1 exact prefix :(

[LoyceV]

How can i change the random number generation in the code , i want to move step by step +1 from a certain base point not +random number , is it something easy to do?!

May I ask why you'd want this? You're basically taking out the randomness, making it less secure.
I do the opposite: add an extra random-file, just in case the standard random isn't random enough.

Code:

-s <file>     Seed random number generator from <file>

1) Why there is no difference? If you start every hour from some random seed, there is probability that you could start from the same wrong seed which you already checked earlier.

Vanitygen uses a different random each time you start it. Chances of using the same seed are small enough to neglect.

2) Why there is no "maximum"? What is "difficulty" mean then?

Imagine throwing a dice: you want to roll a 6. With 6 possible outcomes, I'd say the difficulty is 6. The more times you try, the more likely it becomes to roll a 6.
But, there is no "maximum" number of tries after you're 100% sure you've hit a 6.
Vanitygen has the same probability as this analogy.

So, my statement is:
Maximum Time for prefix finding (with guaranteed result) = Difficulty / Speed
For example, with speed 1000000 keys/second I'll find prefix with 264104224 difficulty with 100% probability for maximum of 264104224/1000000=264 seconds

You're wrong here. Suppose you're really unlucky, and rolled your dice 263 times. The next roll still has a 1 in 6 chance of being a six, there is no guarantee.

[AGD]

...The more times you try, the more likely it becomes to roll a 6.

Dice have no memory. The chance to roll a 6 is the same at every throw. So it is NOT more likely to throw a 6 the more times you try.

[LoyceV]

...The more times you try, the more likely it becomes to roll a 6.

Dice have no memory. The chance to roll a 6 is the same at every throw. So it is NOT more likely to throw a 6 the more times you try.

I think you misunderstood me:

Code:

1	 try: 		16.67%	 chance
2	 tries: 	30.56%	 chance
3	 tries: 	42.13%	 chance
4	 tries: 	51.77%	 chance
5	 tries: 	59.81%	 chance
6	 tries: 	66.51%	 chance
7	 tries: 	72.09%	 chance
8	 tries: 	76.74%	 chance
9	 tries: 	80.62%	 chance
10	 tries: 	83.85%	 chance
11	 tries: 	86.54%	 chance
12	 tries: 	88.78%	 chance
13	 tries: 	90.65%	 chance
14	 tries: 	92.21%	 chance
15	 tries: 	93.51%	 chance
16	 tries: 	94.59%	 chance
17	 tries: 	95.49%	 chance
18	 tries: 	96.24%	 chance
19	 tries: 	96.87%	 chance
20	 tries: 	97.39%	 chance
21	 tries: 	97.83%	 chance
22	 tries: 	98.19%	 chance
23	 tries: 	98.49%	 chance
24	 tries: 	98.74%	 chance
25	 tries: 	98.95%	 chance
26	 tries: 	99.13%	 chance
27	 tries: 	99.27%	 chance
28	 tries: 	99.39%	 chance
29	 tries: 	99.49%	 chance
30	 tries: 	99.58%	 chance
31	 tries: 	99.65%	 chance
32	 tries: 	99.71%	 chance
33	 tries: 	99.76%	 chance
34	 tries: 	99.80%	 chance

[RentGPU]

How can i change the random number generation in the code , i want to move step by step +1 from a certain base point not +random number , is it something easy to do?!

May I ask why you'd want this? You're basically taking out the randomness, making it less secure.
I do the opposite: add an extra random-file, just in case the standard random isn't random enough.

Code:

-s <file>     Seed random number generator from <file>

I need this to make a secure check on an address i already own not to generate a new one , i am trying to connect all my addresses with one private key so that i can remember one key and open all my addresses in a certain sequance i have made , if you don't understand what i am saying then just forward me to something like i said , and you will do me a favour thanks.

[K1773R]

How can i change the random number generation in the code , i want to move step by step +1 from a certain base point not +random number , is it something easy to do?!

May I ask why you'd want this? You're basically taking out the randomness, making it less secure.
I do the opposite: add an extra random-file, just in case the standard random isn't random enough.

Code:

-s <file>     Seed random number generator from <file>

I need this to make a secure check on an address i already own not to generate a new one , i am trying to connect all my addresses with one private key so that i can remember one key and open all my addresses in a certain sequance i have made , if you don't understand what i am saying then just forward me to something like i said , and you will do me a favour thanks.

What you are looking for is this: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Deterministic_wallet

[arulbero]

A couple of question about https://vanitypool.appspot.com/

1) How can I know if I have to use compressed or uncompressed keys for the search? For example, in this case:

https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork   -->  "11111111"
public key: 04C13D9CF2B0E382A4AF29C5E2B97F85C6DD9445F7DCE82CD7207E6FC4716511981B0012C10B39EF1 52257A8407A2965F92F075379D311D5786D9421795B82D01C

can I use only compressed keys?

I found this public key:

Code:

a15f585a9d39a8a091962d11af1e96320fc3543b5201a8c9b12eedf695bad359 3b6621eddf4207bd186c8293c6b497555594b32d2eb9c09ae8f81791a0dfde48

if I add it with the public key

Code:

C13D9CF2B0E382A4AF29C5E2B97F85C6DD9445F7DCE82CD7207E6FC471651198 1B0012C10B39EF152257A8407A2965F92F075379D311D5786D9421795B82D01C

I get this public key

Code:

83f0e53639fbcead931a0d19eb3f3f6684dc75fac68a8c5dbc21cdb8b4ecfb19 d933c437e192b2b6dd27a6b9d09e6470ca220ed27d4bcb05251b1d0e47adad90

in compressed format

Code:

0283f0e53639fbcead931a0d19eb3f3f6684dc75fac68a8c5dbc21cdb8b4ecfb19 

that gives this address (only 7 '1'):

Code:

11111113ix5Nw6kgetPaMBCWBdp5TTfX 

My question is: if I found a match with the pattern "11111111", would it be valid? Or do I have to use only uncompressed keys?

I don't want to waste time with a fruitless quest.

[homculus]

Nah, you do not have to worry about your BTC getting halved or that it will somehow be reduced to create these other coins.

I think there are a lot of people who are getting this wrong and are totally confused with all the FUD that are being spread.

Your original bitcoins are safe, just keep the private key secret and wait for the fork. After the fork, you will have coins from

the new fork too... You can sell or keep those coins, if you have sole control over your private key. Some people store their

bitcoins in services where these services have control over your private key and they can decide what they want to do with

those forked coins.

[jhdscript]

I have a question: using vanitygen it outputs I generate 20Mkeys/s

but when i start:

vanitygen -k -q -i -o out.txt 1

it saves only few addresses.

I don t understand the delta between the power displayed (20Mkeys/s) and the number of address found.

Someone can explain me please?

Regards

[LoyceV]

I have a question: using vanitygen it outputs I generate 20Mkeys/s

but when i start:

vanitygen -k -q -i -o out.txt 1

it saves only few addresses.

I don t understand the delta between the power displayed (20Mkeys/s) and the number of address found.

Are you sure you get 20 Mkeys/s out of vanitygen? The speed sounds like you're using oclvanitygen.

I ran both for about 5 seconds:

Code:

./vanitygen -k -q -i -o out.txt 1
[168.47 Kkey/s][total 669228][Found 2971]

./oclvanitygen -k -q -i -o out.txt 1
[4.84 Mkey/s][total 31457280][Found 5] 

I've been struggling to understand this before, but I don't understand the details enough to know exactly why this is.
From what I understand: oclvanitygen can only output about 1 key per second, it takes time to restart the process in the GPU. Vanitygen searches short prefixes much faster, but loses speed too when it has to output all addresses.
As for why 168 kkeys/s for approximately 5 seconds only outputs 2971 addresses: that's only 1 in approximately 280. I'm not sure why that is.

[Kangaderoo]

... snip ...
As for why 168 kkeys/s for approximately 5 seconds only outputs 2971 addresses: that's only 1 in approximately 280. I'm not sure why that is.

Vanitygen is a address search application, it runs the calculations in address-batches to optimize the heavy EC_POINT calculations.
The search functionality will disregard remaining calculations in the batch when it finds a match.
If only a "1" is specified in the search, each calculation yields a valid result, so the first in the batch is a match, the rest is
disregarded. If you want to use vanitygen as an address generator, you need to change the code to search in smaller batches.

I don't know the specifics of oclvanitygen, but most software that runs on a GPU runs even larger (parallel) batches.
If the same match and throw away routine is used, oclvanitygen will be less productive then vanitygen on small searches.

[jhdscript]

I show thé code but don t find what tout modifs on pattern.c to write all résultats :-(

[arulbero]

I show thé code but don t find what tout modifs on pattern.c to write all résultats :-(

Do you want only to generate many addresses? What speed do you need?

[jhdscript]

Actually I m near 1500key/s using a custom application but I need at least 100000 keys/second for an educational project with students.

Vanitygen appears great soft but it outputs very low number of keys :-(

Any ideas are welcome