Brute force private key tool?

[gadman2]

Lol, professional forum troll.

2^160 (OR) 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 = amount of keys
1 key per second

1/2^160 > 0

1/1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 > 0

Proved by calculations. Care to argue? Didn't think so.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyMQQajTCHw&t=0m2s

[johnyj]

If it is possible, then all the bitcoins will worth nothing

[gusti]

Given one or more monkeys typing random characters, and enough time, you can find almost any private key.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

 

[DannyHamilton]

Proved by calculations. Care to argue? Didn't think so.

You need to work on getting a better understanding of the word "possible" (or at least make sure that everyone is using the same understanding before you try to have a conversation).

You've proven that 1/2¹⁶⁰ > 0

You've not proven that brute forcing a bitcoin address is possible.

You've left out a significant number of very important facts and variables resulting in a useless calculation.

Please calculate the total amount of energy in our solar system that we can use for the purposes of brute forcing the bitcoin address. We'll call this value "availableEnergy"

Please keep in mind that if too much energy is removed from the solar system for this purpose, there won't be enough left for the survival of the inhabitants, and that without any inhabitants to operate the brute forcing equipment, brute forcing won't be possible.

Once you've established the total amount of energy available for the task at hand, given a private key please calculate the total absolute physical minimum amount of energy required to calculate a bitcoin address from that private key. We'll call this value "requiredEnergy".

Clearly if 2¹⁶⁰ X requiredEnergy > availableEnergy, then brute forcing a bitcoin address may not be possible.  If it might not be possible, then you can't say that it is possible.

Of course, all these calculations are based on 2¹⁶⁰ which would be fine if the OP asked about brute forcing a bitcoin address.  However, since you seem so keen on the specifics of the situation, it is perhaps worth noticing that the OP actually asked about brute forcing a private key.  If for some reason we want to find the exact private key, then we might be able to simplify the calculation (assuming we know the public key that we are trying to match) which would reduce the value of requiredEnergy quite a bit.  However, we'd have to increase the search space from 2¹⁶⁰ to 2²⁵⁶.

So perhaps the real quuestion to determine possibility is whether or not the following is true:

2²⁵⁶ X requiredEnergy < availableEnergy

Furthermore, if the amount of time required would be larger than the remaining lifespan of the universe, then any equipment being used to attempt the brute force would be destroyed along with the entire existence of the universe prior to completing the brute force attempt.  As such, it would not be possible to brute force the private key.
Let me know when you've proven that it is possible.

[coastermonger]

If it is possible, then all the bitcoins will worth nothing

I can't believe this thread has devolved into a semantical argument.  A lot of things are technically POSSIBLE in reality without being PROBABLE to happen at all.

This is a case where it's POSSIBLE to brute force a private key but so IMPROBABLE that we make decisions about the future with total disregard to this potentiality.

[DannyHamilton]

- snip -
This is a case where it's POSSIBLE to brute force a private key
- snip -

On the other hand, this is quite likely a case where it is neither possible NOR probable.

[BurtW]

This thread?  Again?  Doesn't anyone know how to use the search function?

Can we all agree that it is not physically possible and will never be physically possible to brute force a key and close this 1000th thread on this very same subject?

By physically above I mean "acording to the laws of thermodynamics and physics"

Please read this entire thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=107172.0

Then if you really want to waste some energy you can run the screen saver mentioned in there and try to do it - even though it is physically not possible.

[mootinator]

This thread?  Again?  Doesn't anyone know how to use the search function?

Can we all agree that it is not physically possible and will never be physically possible to brute force a key and close this 1000th thread on this very same subject?

By physically above I mean "acording to the laws of thermodynamics and physics"

Please read this entire thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=107172.0

Then if you really want to waste some energy you can run the screen saver mentioned in there and try to do it - even though it is physically not possible.

If it were physically impossible to spontaneously generate my key, my computer wouldn't have done it. There's really nothing but astronomical odds against it stopping another computer from doing it. It is reassuring that possible human error aside the universe will cease to exist before that's likely to happen.

OTOH since you're so completely sure it's physically impossible, I'd like to see your proof that P!=NP. You really should be famous if you're just sitting on that.

[2GOOD]

Deep Space Vagabond

My favorite tool around here, briliant in any way... just look at the scale of the number 2^256 = .... hold on ...

anwser to ur question... YES it is possible but highly unlikly

Happy Hashing

[exahash]

Is there a tool that is able to brute force the private key, given a full Bitcoin address? I know it's nearly impossible, but want to try just for fun.

Yes, there is.  But it was developed by the NSA and is not available to the public.

If you'd like to try to develop your own such tool, go ahead, just be aware that jack-booted thugs will show up at your door and "disappear you" if you are successful.

[Nagan]

Estimating things with the lifetime of universe makes no sense besides measuring capabilities of the current technology. Advances in mathematics/computing will make these calculations feasible after decades at most. By the time Bitcoin (in one form or another) will adopt new algorithms.

[jackjack]

Estimating things with the lifetime of universe makes no sense besides measuring capabilities of the current technology. Advances in mathematics/computing will make these calculations feasible after decades at most. By the time Bitcoin (in one form or another) will adopt new algorithms.

Did you read the whole thread? It's physically impossible

[DannyHamilton]

- snip -
Advances in mathematics/computing will make these calculations feasible after decades at most.
- snip -

What calculations?  Brute force?  No, you are mistaken.  Brute force of 256 bit will not be feasible.

[Nagan]

- snip -
Advances in mathematics/computing will make these calculations feasible after decades at most.
- snip -

What calculations?  Brute force?  No, you are mistaken.  Brute force of 256 bit will not be feasible.

In this case: calculations of ECDSA private keys. Most probably by using weakneses in algorithm, not by a blind brute force. The result is what matters.
Do you really believe that after 30-40 years secp256k1 will still be considered secure?

I'm not even a mathematician, just devil's advocating. What about using Shor's algorithm to narrow the timeframe?

[jackjack]

The thread is about brute forcing private keys, not about breaking secp256k1

[BurtW]

The thread is about brute forcing private keys, not about breaking secp256k1

I will try one more time.

This is the algorithm for "bute forcing" a public/private key pair:

    a) Key_public = G, Key_private = 1
    b) Is Key_pubic the key we are looking for?
    c) If yes Key_private is the one you are looking for so quit
    d) else Key_public = Key_pubic + G, Key_private = Key_private + 1
    e) goto b)

Note the following:

The operation Key_pubic + G requires many mathematical steps
If you are looking for a Bitcoin address you have to do even more mathematical steps on each trial to hash the public key three times

Now consider this much easier problem, just Key_private = Key_private + 1

Imagine a physical device which simply counts the numbers from 1 to n where n is the largest possible private key, a simple 256 bit counter.  That is all it does is count.  It is only the simplest part of the algorithm described above.
This counter can be made using any possible future technology, it just has to obey the laws of physics and thermodynamics.

This perfect device will count a fast a physically possible using the lowest physically possible amount of energy to do it.  

How long would it take to just count from 1 to n?  

How much energy would it take?

BTW n = FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFE BAAEDCE6 AF48A03B BFD25E8C D0364141  

[Dabs]

While we're talking about the impossibility of the probabilities, you guys realize that there is no such thing as a provably fair bitcoin casino in existence.

They are all Probably Fair. Because they don't use provably secure hash algorithms, even though those functions exist. It's much easier to just use SHA-256 or SHA-512 and keep tabs on the 256 to 512 bit number.

But of course, everyone else will just say, no it is provable, you can prove to yourself ... (no, technically, you are relying on collision resistance with such a large bit space.)

[jackjack]

The thread is about brute forcing private keys, not about breaking secp256k1

I will try one more time.

This is the algorithm for "bute forcing" a public/private key pair:

    a) Key_public = G, Key_private = 1
    b) Is Key_pubic the key we are looking for?
    c) If yes Key_private is the one you are looking for so quit
    d) else Key_public = Key_pubic + G, Key_private = Key_private + 1
    e) goto b)

Note the following:

The operation Key_pubic + G requires many mathematical steps
If you are looking for a Bitcoin address you have to do even more mathematical steps on each trial to hash the public key three times

Now consider this much easier problem, just Key_private = Key_private + 1

Imagine a physical device which simply counts the numbers from 1 to n where n is the largest possible private key, a simple 256 bit counter.  That is all it does is count.  It is only the simplest part of the algorithm described above.
This counter can be made using any possible future technology, it just has to obey the laws of physics and thermodynamics.

This perfect device will count a fast a physically possible using the lowest physically possible amount of energy to do it. 

How long would it take to just count from 1 to n? 

How much energy would it take?

BTW n = FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFE BAAEDCE6 AF48A03B BFD25E8C D0364141 

Hmm, yeah I know I've been saying this in many posts...
I was answering Nagan who said that breaking secp256k1 would help brute-forcing private keys

[Nagan]

The thread is about brute forcing private keys, not about breaking secp256k1

I somehow feel that OP meant of having any practical way to compute a private key - and not to feed the semantic trolls
So depends on how are you defining the brute-forcing itself.

For any practical purposes, it is empirically probable that:
1. RIPEMD-160 & SHA256 & ECDSA algorithms will weaken in our lifetime due to advancing mathematics or weaknesses in design.
2. Quantum computing will advance. Modified Shor's/Grover's algorithms (or any new ones) will decrease the iteration count. I wonder how much acceleration the current theoretical implementions would give.

The probability for combination of these events in our lifetime (or even 10/5/2 years) can be roughly estimated, so that may show some interesting possibility on having the working tool.

[BurtW]

I somehow feel that OP meant of having any practical way to compute a private key - and not to feed the semantic trolls
So depends on how are you defining the brute-forcing itself.

I disagree.

Is there a tool that is able to brute force the private key, given a full Bitcoin address? I know it's nearly impossible, but want to try just for fun.

The OP said "brute force"
The OP said "I want to try it just for fun" meaning now, not in the future.

My post addresses the question posted by stating that since it will never be possible to even count from 1 to (about) 2²⁵⁶ by any physical means, let alone count and calculate Key_public = Key_public + G [and hash that result three times] it is obviously currently, and will always be, impossible to find a specific key pair by a brute force algorithm.