This message was too old and has been purged

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[1713562252]

1713562252

[1713562252]

1713562252

[1713562252]

1713562252

[1713562252]

1713562252

[b!z]

This is actually for cracking public addresses and finding the private key? lol

[r3wt]

This is actually for cracking public addresses and finding the private key? lol

DOH!

[gweedo]

Don't anyone buy this, it is impossible to brute force a private key, it would take many many lifetimes. This is the protection that addresses give.

[gweedo]

Don't anyone buy this, it is impossible to brute force a private key, it would take many many lifetimes. This is the protection that addresses give.

That's what gweedo says. But who tells us "gweedo is the pure incarnation of physics laws"?
I would rather say, the facts are described in the original posting - now the people may position it in their own world view and judge weather they find it useful or not.

Actually I can prove Gweedo is wrong:
I can generate millions of Public/Private Key pairs that are being cracked within seconds. Alone the existence of one such key should prove that "gweedo" is somewhat ... well ... let's say on the wrong path.

It is called math, people don't have to believe me it is math.

[gweedo]

gweedo, as you are talking about math:

If you say something like: "it is impossible to brute force a private key, it would take many many lifetimes"
And I give you a key, that can be bruteforced in 10 seconds, than - by definition - your statement was proven to be wrong.

Stop playing this, let me use your words and twist them you know what I mean. Just generating a key pair is not brute forcing.

[gweedo]

gweedo, as you are talking about math:

If you say something like: "it is impossible to brute force a private key, it would take many many lifetimes"
And I give you a key, that can be bruteforced in 10 seconds, than - by definition - your statement was proven to be wrong.

Stop playing this, let me use your words and twist them you know what I mean. Just generating a key pair is not brute forcing.

You got it wrong. What I mean is, I could generate a key pair, share the public key with you, and you would be able to recover my private key in an instant with any "script kiddy key cracker" in a manner of seconds.  Alone the existence of such key proves that it does not neccessarily take a lifetime.

That is impossible, so stop lying. If that is true do it on my address https://blockchain.info/address/1GweedoZJYb5CNLfSaBgBBYS2y7BMVb2Wo

[gweedo]

You abviously have not read my answer correctly.
Please do so, then we can continue talking.

Wait so you can't brute force my address in seconds then? $16 in that address it could be yours. The public key is visible since I have done transactions so if that is what you need it is there.

[meowmix4jo]

gweedo, as you are talking about math:

If you say something like: "it is impossible to brute force a private key, it would take many many lifetimes"
And I give you a key, that can be bruteforced in 10 seconds, than - by definition - your statement was proven to be wrong.

Stop playing this, let me use your words and twist them you know what I mean. Just generating a key pair is not brute forcing.

You got it wrong. What I mean is, I could generate a key pair, share the public key with you, and you would be able to recover my private key in an instant with any "script kiddy key cracker" in a manner of seconds.   Alone the existence of such key proves that it does not neccessarily take a lifetime.

That is impossible, so stop lying. If that is true do it on my address https://blockchain.info/address/1GweedoZJYb5CNLfSaBgBBYS2y7BMVb2Wo

He's not saying he can get the privkey for any bitcoin address, it sounds like it can only get the privkeys for certain "weak" addresses and close approximations for others. Some private keys should be MUCH easier to find that others, so this could actually be legit. If it's useful is a different question.

[gweedo]

gweedo, as you are talking about math:

If you say something like: "it is impossible to brute force a private key, it would take many many lifetimes"
And I give you a key, that can be bruteforced in 10 seconds, than - by definition - your statement was proven to be wrong.

Stop playing this, let me use your words and twist them you know what I mean. Just generating a key pair is not brute forcing.

You got it wrong. What I mean is, I could generate a key pair, share the public key with you, and you would be able to recover my private key in an instant with any "script kiddy key cracker" in a manner of seconds.  Alone the existence of such key proves that it does not neccessarily take a lifetime.

That is impossible, so stop lying. If that is true do it on my address https://blockchain.info/address/1GweedoZJYb5CNLfSaBgBBYS2y7BMVb2Wo

He's not saying he can get the privkey for any bitcoin address, it sounds like it can only get the privkeys for certain "weak" addresses and close approximations for others. Some private keys should be MUCH easier to find that others, so this could actually be legit. If it's useful is a different question.

Then he is talking about hacking brain wallets due to the random entropy being a word or something easy.

[blodyx]

This is what i was afraid about when i started the other thred https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=430000.0

That some evil-genius find a smart algorithm to break it all

How many combinations are there to try when you have the public key?

[gweedo]

This is what i was afraid about when i started the other thred https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=430000.0

That some evil-genius find a smart algorithm to break it all

How many combinations are there to try when you have the public key?

No one has broken the ESCDA public key, if he did he would have taken a lot of money and he hasn't. He didn't take my address and the public key is published since I have done transactions with it. He is probably harboring back to the android flaw or something like that. Nothing to be worried about it.

This is just some FUD nothing serious.

[gweedo]

No one has broken the ESCDA public key, if he did he would have taken a lot of money and he hasn't. He didn't take my address and the public key is published since I have done transactions with it. He is probably harboring back to the android flaw or something like that. Nothing to be worried about it.

This is just some FUD nothing serious.

And I do not take your concerns serious. You obviously have no that much ida about cryptography, you have no serious mathematical background, you probably did not even understand a single word of what I was talking about (or at least you prentend). Actually, ECDSA is breakable by nature - the question is just with what complexity. And there are certain tricks to reduce the overall complexity, and there are addresses which complexity is pretty low by nature.

But I think it is wasted time to explain everything to you. And what the hell should I do with your $16 wallet. Have a delicious lunch at McDonald's?   

I have a degree in mathematics so yeah, but don't you want to prove me wrong? I want you to take my money.

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[gweedo]

You simply do not understand it.
I wish I had made this topic moderated, then I could delete such trolls and troublemakers like you and keep the thread clean.

I am not trolling LOL I am proving you very much wrong.

[dbell]

What you are describing sounds like it efficiently detects partial collisions with your rendezvous points and then from there you may be close enough to crack it in matter of days.    You have not reduced the overall search space for cracking any random address but you have greatly increased your chances and efficiency of cracking an address mathematically close to one of your Rendezvous points.

So by definition, a so called "weak" address is one that is close to a Rendezvous point


If the entire address space is 2^N,
Let A = Log2(#Rendezvous points)
Let B = Log2(#of Addresses you can brute force in few days around any one Rendezvous point)

Then within this few day time limit, you can crack any address that falls in the "weak" space of size 2^(A+B) and cannot crack any address that falls in the "hard" space of size 2^(N-A-B)

Is that about right?  If not can you describe sizes of the weak space that you can attack.

[Ritual]

Waiting with anticipation for the video

But I am also interested in an answer to that question. Approximately what proportion of the namespace could be regarded as "reasonably crackable" (i.e. within say a month on a home computer)?

Thanks,

Ritual.

[gweedo]

Hey guys,

here you see a proof of concept video.
- I am using a randomly generated bitcoin address (however they are all weak as you see)
- Alone this shows you that there exist many many many weak (almost an infinite number of) bitcoin addresses.
- I am working live on the block chain with real coins (all transactions in the video can be verified on blockchain.info)
- I am cracking the bitcoin address in a few seconds

Sorry for all the cursing but the day has been pretty stressful. 

Show nothing but ok keep thinking you have a program that can crack private keys.

[Evil-Knievel]

This message was too old and has been purged

[bmoconno]

Very interesting.

As far as the debate going on here, why doesn't Gweedo just generate a weak address (not just any address, one that meets to criteria that Evil-Knievel sets out) and post it here.  Evil-Knievel can send a small amount of coins to the address, then crack the address and take his coins back?

Alternatively, and considerably more interestingly in my opinion, you could agree on a third party/escrow to generate a weak address.  Then both Gweedo and Evil-Knievel deposit a set (small) amount of BTC to the address.  Then Evil-Knievel has a set amount of time to break the private key before the Escrow sends all of the coins to Gweedo.

Just sayin'