Angelo1710
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
August 15, 2019, 08:57:36 PM |
|
Tnx man, that did the trick. It works
|
|
|
|
almightyruler
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2268
Merit: 1092
|
|
August 15, 2019, 11:49:08 PM |
|
I'm still not sure how randomly hopping around a massive search space will improve your chances of finding a match.
|
|
|
|
iparktur
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 1
|
|
August 16, 2019, 11:59:29 AM Last edit: August 16, 2019, 04:35:19 PM by iparktur |
|
avw - This is the source code, you need to compile it in executable file (section "Building in Windows/Linux")How to install is understandable. How to compile - https://github.com/pikachunakapika/BitCrack ? Maybe somewhere there is a step-by-step explanation of how to COMPILE -?
|
|
|
|
Telariust
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 18
|
|
August 19, 2019, 01:34:02 PM Last edit: August 23, 2019, 06:27:59 AM by Telariust |
|
Nothing found.. any clues what is going on / what Im doing wrong?
hmm.. it not u. when I wrote this I wanted to demonstrate that this is generally possible. Now I see that I did not take into account special cases ... need to consider and complement .. manually calculating this is inconvenient, it's time to write a script python3 script success wrote and add to faq post: bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4453897.msg52106273#msg52106273 if the checksum(or/and flag compress x01) is corrupted, than recovery now is impossible. (--stride opt becomes float but must be integer!) Recovery of these keys is possible only if brichard19 implements support float for --stride opt. if it is easier to explain.. In WIFbase58privkey, each lost symbol(*/?) to the right is a division stride by 58. Already from the middle, the stride no longer divides completely. What does checksum have to do with it? In fact, the checksum forms the float part. While it is equal, then when subtracting it is reset. As soon as it becomes different for lowerKey and lowerKey+1, this indicates - stride becomes float.
|
|
|
|
Angelo1710
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
September 01, 2019, 03:05:32 PM |
|
Anyone can fork the latest version of Bitcrack to do random searches on each point?
|
|
|
|
iparktur
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 1
|
|
September 02, 2019, 06:20:43 AM Merited by vapourminer (1) |
|
Where to take for AMD the ready version clBitcrack.exe (which it is not necessary to compile and simply to start from a command line) with functions -r, --random Each point will start in random KEYSPACE :
xxBitCrack.exe [OPTIONS] [TARGETS]
Where [TARGETS] are one or more Bitcoin address
Options:
-i, --in FILE Read addresses from FILE, one address per line. If FILE is "-" then stdin is read
-o, --out FILE Append private keys to FILE, one per line
-d, --device N Use device with ID equal to N
-b, --blocks BLOCKS The number of CUDA blocks
-t, --threads THREADS Threads per block
-p, --points NUMBER Each thread will process NUMBER keys at a time
-r, --random Each point will start in random KEYSPACE
--keyspace KEYSPACE Specify the range of keys to search, where KEYSPACE is in the format,
START:END start at key START, end at key END START:+COUNT start at key START and end at key START + COUNT :END start at key 1 and end at key END :+COUNT start at key 1 and end at key 1 + COUNT
-c, --compressed Search for compressed keys (default). Can be used with -u to also search uncompressed keys
-u, --uncompressed Search for uncompressed keys, can be used with -c to search compressed keys
--compression MODE Specify the compression mode, where MODE is 'compressed' or 'uncompressed' or 'both'
--list-devices List available devices
--stride NUMBER Increment by NUMBER
--share M/N Divide the keyspace into N equal sized shares, process the Mth share
--continue FILE Save/load progress from FILE
|
|
|
|
vimp666
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 37
Merit: 1
|
|
September 02, 2019, 03:09:49 PM Merited by vapourminer (1) |
|
Where to take for AMD the ready version clBitcrack.exe (which it is not necessary to compile and simply to start from a command line) with functions -r, --random
and if you click on the releases on the page you will definitely find it https://github.com/pikachunakapika/BitCrack/releases
|
|
|
|
iparktur
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 1
|
|
September 02, 2019, 07:13:13 PM |
|
vimp666 - THANK !!! It works, this is what I was looking for.
|
|
|
|
MercyLu
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 3
Merit: 0
|
|
September 03, 2019, 06:17:50 AM |
|
How to compile, anyone know?
|
|
|
|
iparktur
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 1
|
|
September 03, 2019, 06:55:50 AM |
|
How to compile, anyone know?
This does not need to be compiled - https://github.com/pikachunakapika/BitCrack/releases . Download to your hard drive software "clBitCrack.exe" . You start from the command line (cmd) - you specify the path to clBitCrack.exe and search parameters.
|
|
|
|
tync
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 66
Merit: 0
|
|
September 03, 2019, 01:38:33 PM |
|
Hello My rx470 4gb gives only 80Mkey/s it's normal? I tested with these parameters in Windows 10 : clBitCrack.exe -b 32 -t 256 -p 4096 -c 1FRoHA9xewq7DjrZ1psWJVeTer8gHRqEvR as I understand it for cards from AMD this program is poorly optimized
|
|
|
|
ABCbits
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2954
Merit: 7706
Crypto Swap Exchange
|
|
September 03, 2019, 05:13:21 PM Last edit: September 03, 2019, 05:49:25 PM by ETFbitcoin Merited by vapourminer (1) |
|
Hello My rx470 4gb gives only 80Mkey/s it's normal? I tested with these parameters in Windows 10 : clBitCrack.exe -b 32 -t 256 -p 4096 -c 1FRoHA9xewq7DjrZ1psWJVeTer8gHRqEvR as I understand it for cards from AMD this program is poorly optimized You might want to check earlier posts : - RX 480 is have 20% faster speed, but few websites (such as UserBenchmark report RX 480 generally only 10% faster on non-gaming benchmark
Rx480 8Gb 107.04 MKey/s clBitCrack --b 72 -t 256 -p 2048
Rx480 4Gb 100.00 MKey/s clBitCrack --b 72 -t 256 -p 1024
- A user with RX 570 (which is rebrand of RX 470) recommend these parameter, you might get better speed with this parameter
For RX 570, what are CLBitcrack -b -t and -p? Please... Rx570 has 32 compute units , try this -b 64 -t 256 -p 1024 TLDR : looks like the speed is nearly normal, but it could be faster or optimized
|
|
|
|
tync
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 66
Merit: 0
|
|
September 03, 2019, 05:45:25 PM |
|
ETFbitcoin thanks but I already tried it and got no difference -b 64 rx470 only 32 compute units . I noticed that the speed is affected by the core clock. but since my video card has poor cooling, I think the 83Mkey/s limit is for me. I wanted to try the VanitySearch, but as it turned out, it works only with Nvidia i am going to buy GTX 1080. I’m very interested in what speed the vega(56,64) has
|
|
|
|
tync
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 66
Merit: 0
|
|
September 03, 2019, 06:41:47 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
tync
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 66
Merit: 0
|
|
September 03, 2019, 06:46:58 PM |
|
in this benchmark hashcat amd vega 64 better than gtx 1080 for algoritms RIPEMD-160(14%) and SHA-256(30%)
|
|
|
|
Angelo1710
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
September 05, 2019, 07:24:19 PM |
|
Can some1 fork latest version of bitcrack so it does -r random on every point across selected keyspace. So every jump/try is random. Not like in pikachunakapika version where it chooses random staring points and then starts doing them in 1 increment at a time. Kinda like generating random hex key on each try within selected keyspace.
|
|
|
|
Telariust
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 18
|
|
September 05, 2019, 11:11:03 PM Last edit: September 05, 2019, 11:24:13 PM by Telariust |
|
..random on every point across selected keyspace. So every jump/try is random. Not like in pikachunakapika version where it chooses random staring points and then starts doing them in 1 increment at a time..
The Engine of these programs is divided into two types: 1) optimized point addition (for quick calculation of sequential keys) sample programs: vanitygen, bitcrack, vanitysearch, break_short; methods: - calc only X coordinates (for compressed keys); - use of functions without protection against side channel attacks (openssl/secp256k1); main problem - inversion calculation is very expensive, ~20mult per 1 point; can use batch inversion (Simultaneous algorithm, 1 inversion per 1000 keys) + Affines coordinates + symmetry(only full range) + endomorphism(only full range); 2) optimized point multiplication (for quick calculation of random keys) sample programs: brainflayer; methods: - secp256k1 library with pre-calculated mult table in ram; - Jacobian coordinates; main problem random mult - inversion need too, but can not use batch inversion because each key is random. BitCrack is optimized for sequentially calculating points in a limited range using addition. VanitySearch is optimized for sequentially calculating points in the full range using addition (and 4 multiplication algorithms that work only for the full range). BrainFlayer (cpu only) is optimized for random calculating points in a full range using multiplication. You want to get random points in a limited range using multiplication. These are fundamentally different tasks. If you delve into the study of random generators, you will find that they have top speed. Typically, the problem is that the overhead of generating random numbers is greater than the useful calculation itself. PS: about multiplication At start BitCrack, pre-computes the starting points using multiplication. It is so slow that starting from version 0.15 the author transferred the procedure to gpu. see 1post - v0.0.6... the author does not come here for more than a year
|
|
|
|
Angelo1710
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
September 06, 2019, 01:01:27 PM |
|
..random on every point across selected keyspace. So every jump/try is random. Not like in pikachunakapika version where it chooses random staring points and then starts doing them in 1 increment at a time..
The Engine of these programs is divided into two types: 1) optimized point addition (for quick calculation of sequential keys) sample programs: vanitygen, bitcrack, vanitysearch, break_short; methods: - calc only X coordinates (for compressed keys); - use of functions without protection against side channel attacks (openssl/secp256k1); main problem - inversion calculation is very expensive, ~20mult per 1 point; can use batch inversion (Simultaneous algorithm, 1 inversion per 1000 keys) + Affines coordinates + symmetry(only full range) + endomorphism(only full range); 2) optimized point multiplication (for quick calculation of random keys) sample programs: brainflayer; methods: - secp256k1 library with pre-calculated mult table in ram; - Jacobian coordinates; main problem random mult - inversion need too, but can not use batch inversion because each key is random. BitCrack is optimized for sequentially calculating points in a limited range using addition. VanitySearch is optimized for sequentially calculating points in the full range using addition (and 4 multiplication algorithms that work only for the full range). BrainFlayer (cpu only) is optimized for random calculating points in a full range using multiplication. You want to get random points in a limited range using multiplication. These are fundamentally different tasks. If you delve into the study of random generators, you will find that they have top speed. Typically, the problem is that the overhead of generating random numbers is greater than the useful calculation itself. PS: about multiplication At start BitCrack, pre-computes the starting points using multiplication. It is so slow that starting from version 0.15 the author transferred the procedure to gpu. see 1post - v0.0.6... the author does not come here for more than a year Ty for your explanation, I can't pm u back because of messaging limits. So basically there is no way to combine really fast random hex generator to work with the calculation process? So all we can do is randomly get starting points and from there work in increments.
|
|
|
|
Telariust
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 38
Merit: 18
|
|
September 06, 2019, 05:09:37 PM Last edit: September 06, 2019, 06:19:56 PM by Telariust |
|
..Ty for your explanation, I can't pm u back because of messaging limits. So basically there is no way to combine really fast random hex generator to work with the calculation process? So all we can do is randomly get starting points and from there work in increments.
True, according to my knowledge after 1 year of research. In fact, you want a gpu BrainFlayer. Everyone wants it) Ryan refuses to write it because he is a WhiteHat. If successful, it will be slower than sequentially calculating points. ########################## heuristic calculate the hashrate for BrainFlayer cuda/opencl BrainFlayer cpu sse 0,1 Mk/s - 1core i7-6820 8core - 4core real, 4core hyper-threading, so x6 instead x8 0,6 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 VanityGen x64 opencl 60.7 Mk/s - gtx980 0,52 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 60.7/0,52 = x116,7 (vg opencl gpu/cpu) VanityGen x64 cpu sse 1,38 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 1,38/0,52 = x2,6 (vg sse/opencl) now if imagine BrainFlayer opencl 0,6x(1/2,6) = 0,23 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 0,23x116,7 = 26,8 Mk/s - gtx980 if clBitCrack opencl 67.7 Mk/s - gtx980 cuBitCrack cuda 153.5 Mk/s - gtx980 241.3 Mk/s - gtx1070 153.5/67.7 = x2,26 (bc cuda/opencl) then BrainFlayer cuda 26,8x2,26 = 60,5 Mk/s - gtx980 60,5x(241.3/153.5) = 94,9 Mk/s - gtx1070
|
|
|
|
Angelo1710
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 26
Merit: 0
|
|
September 06, 2019, 06:47:52 PM |
|
..Ty for your explanation, I can't pm u back because of messaging limits. So basically there is no way to combine really fast random hex generator to work with the calculation process? So all we can do is randomly get starting points and from there work in increments.
True, according to my knowledge after 1 year of research. In fact, you want a gpu BrainFlayer. Everyone wants it) Ryan refuses to write it because he is a WhiteHat. If successful, it will be slower than sequentially calculating points. ########################## heuristic calculate the hashrate for BrainFlayer cuda/opencl BrainFlayer cpu sse 0,1 Mk/s - 1core i7-6820 8core - 4core real, 4core hyper-threading, so x6 instead x8 0,6 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 VanityGen x64 opencl 60.7 Mk/s - gtx980 0,52 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 60.7/0,52 = x116,7 (vg opencl gpu/cpu) VanityGen x64 cpu sse 1,38 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 1,38/0,52 = x2,6 (vg sse/opencl) now if imagine BrainFlayer opencl 0,6x(1/2,6) = 0,23 Mk/s - 8core i7-6820 0,23x116,7 = 26,8 Mk/s - gtx980 if clBitCrack opencl 67.7 Mk/s - gtx980 cuBitCrack cuda 153.5 Mk/s - gtx980 241.3 Mk/s - gtx1070 153.5/67.7 = x2,26 (bc cuda/opencl) then BrainFlayer cuda 26,8x2,26 = 60,5 Mk/s - gtx980 60,5x(241.3/153.5) = 94,9 Mk/s - gtx1070 Thanks, nice info. What about pollard-rho versions of this people talk in other threads, but there is no publicly available tool to try it (to my knowledge)?
|
|
|
|
|