VanitySearch (Yet another address prefix finder)

[WhyFhy]

Anyone want to work 1qwertyuiop with me for a month or so and profit split?
I'll be running 2x v100s to solve.
Reward is 1.2BTC

[NotATether]

Anyone want to work 1qwertyuiop with me for a month or so and profit split?
I'll be running 2x v100s to solve.
Reward is 1.2BTC

AFAIK, VanitySearch can't connect systems together as nodes to divide the keys among for searching, it can only run an independent search when multiple systems are involved. So how are you going to make this work out without you and your prospective partner(s) searching a bunch of duplicate keys?

[WhyFhy]

Anyone want to work 1qwertyuiop with me for a month or so and profit split?
I'll be running 2x v100s to solve.
Reward is 1.2BTC

AFAIK, VanitySearch can't connect systems together as nodes to divide the keys among for searching, it can only run an independent search when multiple systems are involved. So how are you going to make this work out without you and your prospective partner(s) searching a bunch of duplicate keys?

mutual trust or remote console proofing

*I highly doubt there will be duplicates lol - odds are almost 0

** But you've sparked an idea ! What if we could submit worked keys to a live server that other workers are working too?  Or remote cluster our machines together to generate a single kps output?  You know make vanitypool a solve pool too.

[NotATether]

** But you've sparked an idea ! What if we could submit worked keys to a live server that other workers are working too?  Or remote cluster our machines together to generate a single kps output?  You know make vanitypool a solve pool too.

Sounds doable, considering there are pools on the Internet for finding prime numbers. In this case the nodes would connect to the server and when someone requests for a prefix generated, the elliptic curve stuff is split among all the workers without sending the actual intermediate keys anywhere (maybe a hash of the key if it's really required). That should solve privacy issues.

Or we could go the peer-to-peer route where each VanitySearch instance is its own server, and a node would use a distributed tracking service to find nodes to connect to in order to pool the elliptic curve stuff. And here there is no central server which can be compromised.

Downside to both of these is that people are not going to pool for free, so there has to be some financial incentive to join a prefix pool like the kind of reward you have.

[xhomerx10]

Anyone want to work 1qwertyuiop with me for a month or so and profit split?
I'll be running 2x v100s to solve.
Reward is 1.2BTC

AFAIK, VanitySearch can't connect systems together as nodes to divide the keys among for searching, it can only run an independent search when multiple systems are involved. So how are you going to make this work out without you and your prospective partner(s) searching a bunch of duplicate keys?

mutual trust or remote console proofing

*I highly doubt there will be duplicates lol - odds are almost 0

** But you've sparked an idea ! What if we could submit worked keys to a live server that other workers are working too?  Or remote cluster our machines together to generate a single kps output?  You know make vanitypool a solve pool too.

 I love the idea but I just did a quick estimate based on my RTX 2070 which gives a 50% probability in 177.7 years using VanitySearch.

 177.7years x 365.24days/year x 24hrs/day x 0.175Watts x 0.10 dollars/kWh = 27259.32 dollars

 and the 1.2 BTC prize is currently worth ~ 28240 dollars (from Preev.com)

 Even if we were lucky, splitting the prize would more than likely result in a loss;  I chose 0.10 $/kWh as n nice easy number to work with but my electricity is almost 0.20 $/kwhr and some are even higher.   The average American pays 13 cents per kWh (electricchoice.com/electricity-prices-by-state/) for electricity.

[WhyFhy]

Make it like a mining pool, get paid based on contributed computing power? Scedule a online search day/event, it would be a feat that's history book worthy too.
As long as we can get that time estimate down to less then a week or less ,
I cant help but think I've seen guys use fpga applications in remote situations while brute forcing keyphrases
I could be wrong it could be off base too.

*do a 10%(idk) dev fee for whoever writes it up and solution finder gets 10% , the rest get paid accordingly based on submitted hashpower? 

The data could be used to calculate scenarios

[ranochigo]

Make it like a mining pool, get paid based on contributed computing power? Scedule a online search day/event, it would be a feat that's history book worthy too.
As long as we can get that time estimate down to less then a week or less ,
I cant help but think I've seen guys use fpga applications in remote situations while brute forcing keyphrases
I could be wrong it could be off base too.

Split key generation could work. What you could do is to post your part public key and get people to help you find it and split the reward with whoever gets the correct solution. I don't think there is a verifiable way to validate contributed computing power, or at least none that I've seen.

This[1] was one of the first few vanity pools but I don't think it is pretty active nowadays.

[1] https://vanitypool.appspot.com/

[bigvito19]

Something similar to what people are doing on this site http://www.ttdsales.com/64bit/login.php they are going after key #64 https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/16jY7qLJnxb7CHZyqBP8qca9d51gAjyXQN

[elisacat]

Anyone want to work 1qwertyuiop with me for a month or so and profit split?
I'll be running 2x v100s to solve.
Reward is 1.2BTC

*I highly doubt there will be duplicates lol - odds are almost 0

But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?

Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?

[ranochigo]

But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?

It would be a huge security risk to have it run sequentially. Imagine if I were to try to get bc1qw and since it runs sequentially, another person also gets the same bc1qw address.  It has a RNG to ensure the randomness.

Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?

Vanity gen brute forces using the given split public key. When it gets the correct solution, it'll produce your part public key and part private key. Give the private key combine with their part private key and the address will be as defined in the pattern.

[elisacat]

But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?

It would be a huge security risk to have it run sequentially. Imagine if I were to try to get bc1qw and since it runs sequentially, another person also gets the same bc1qw address.  It has a RNG to ensure the randomness.

Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?

Vanity gen brute forces using the given split public key. When it gets the correct solution, it'll produce your part public key and part private key. Give the private key combine with their part private key and the address will be as defined in the pattern.

I see so it works differently from bitcrack then? because the biggest issue with bitcrack was the developer never wanted to add randomness so it would start at a specified sequence and work its way up +1, +1 etc etc
which never made sense to me because users with million + database would all be going through the same numbers so duplicated effort

if Vanitysearch really generates the sequences in calculation randomly that's a big advantage.

Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.

[NotATether]

Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.

You pass the public key and a prefix through a vanity search program, and then that gives you one of the private keys needed. My understanding is that to combine two private keys, you first convert them into large numbers, and then compute something called a Lagrange interpolation polynomial (source) at 0. And this has parameters x and y which are contained inside each private key, and the x's I know are inputs to this polynomial because I read the code, and y's are solutions of a split-key equation that uses a different polynomial.

It's complicated math, and I'll have to go over it for a few days before I fully understand it.

[WanderingPhilospher]

But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?

It would be a huge security risk to have it run sequentially. Imagine if I were to try to get bc1qw and since it runs sequentially, another person also gets the same bc1qw address.  It has a RNG to ensure the randomness.

Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?

Vanity gen brute forces using the given split public key. When it gets the correct solution, it'll produce your part public key and part private key. Give the private key combine with their part private key and the address will be as defined in the pattern.

I see so it works differently from bitcrack then? because the biggest issue with bitcrack was the developer never wanted to add randomness so it would start at a specified sequence and work its way up +1, +1 etc etc
which never made sense to me because users with million + database would all be going through the same numbers so duplicated effort

if Vanitysearch really generates the sequences in calculation randomly that's a big advantage.

Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.

The author of Bitcrack didn't specifically develop Bitcrack to be used by a pool or a combined effort; so while you speak of "duplicated effort", I don't think that is exact.  He created the program for individuals to search for keys specifically tied to the 100 BTC puzzle/challenge.

So it's up to people to tweak the code or use it in a way to not duplicate effort, like the pool at ttd...effort is not duplicated because users are assigned different ranges to work on.

Adding randomness, to start at a specified sequence...what does that mean? The point of randomness should or could mean not knowing what key the program starts with, or each thread generates/starts at random keys.  I have modified a version of Bitcrack where each GPU thread generates a random key, and then starts searching sequentially from that key. And you can also tell the program to "regenerate" every x amount of keys searched.  

Vanity generates the random base key, but then sequentially (and inverse) searches for xyz prefix. User can use the rekey function to generate a new random base key.

[elisacat]

Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.

You pass the public key and a prefix through a vanity search program, and then that gives you one of the private keys needed. My understanding is that to combine two private keys, you first convert them into large numbers, and then compute something called a Lagrange interpolation polynomial (source) at 0. And this has parameters x and y which are contained inside each private key, and the x's I know are inputs to this polynomial because I read the code, and y's are solutions of a split-key equation that uses a different polynomial.

It's complicated math, and I'll have to go over it for a few days before I fully understand it.

Thanks, sounds complicated for sure

[elisacat]

But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?

It would be a huge security risk to have it run sequentially. Imagine if I were to try to get bc1qw and since it runs sequentially, another person also gets the same bc1qw address.  It has a RNG to ensure the randomness.

Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?

Vanity gen brute forces using the given split public key. When it gets the correct solution, it'll produce your part public key and part private key. Give the private key combine with their part private key and the address will be as defined in the pattern.

I see so it works differently from bitcrack then? because the biggest issue with bitcrack was the developer never wanted to add randomness so it would start at a specified sequence and work its way up +1, +1 etc etc
which never made sense to me because users with million + database would all be going through the same numbers so duplicated effort

if Vanitysearch really generates the sequences in calculation randomly that's a big advantage.

Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.

The author of Bitcrack didn't specifically develop Bitcrack to be used by a pool or a combined effort; so while you speak of "duplicated effort", I don't think that is exact.  He created the program for individuals to search for keys specifically tied to the 100 BTC puzzle/challenge.

So it's up to people to tweak the code or use it in a way to not duplicate effort, like the pool at ttd...effort is not duplicated because users are assigned different ranges to work on.

Adding randomness, to start at a specified sequence...what does that mean? The point of randomness should or could mean not knowing what key the program starts with, or each thread generates/starts at random keys.  I have modified a version of Bitcrack where each GPU thread generates a random key, and then starts searching sequentially from that key. And you can also tell the program to "regenerate" every x amount of keys searched.  

Vanity generates the random base key, but then sequentially (and inverse) searches for xyz prefix. User can use the rekey function to generate a new random base key.

I guess you're right, for it's intended purposes it does the job correctly. Is your version of Bitcrack available publicly or on Github to try? I've attempted something similar, currently i have a python script that generates random hex and feeds it to bitcrack (similar like a batch script) so it will open bitcrack then run for 10 minutes with random x characters changed then repeat etc etc with the option of choosing to randomize the x number of characters from beginning or from the end. So it's a semi random solution since the sharting hash is changed every 10 minutes but bitcrack still runs sequentially for each starting point which i can do nothing about

[WanderingPhilospher]

But i thought the way VanitySearch works is similar to bitcrack (sequentially) and not random. Doesn't that mean if 10 people start working on the same string you provided that they would all go through the same exact process and duplication?

It would be a huge security risk to have it run sequentially. Imagine if I were to try to get bc1qw and since it runs sequentially, another person also gets the same bc1qw address.  It has a RNG to ensure the randomness.

Also on a separate note. For argument's sake lets say we run this for nearly 150 years and our grandsons get a match. Isn't there still a high possibility that since you defined only partial public key that the results would not be the exact same key? e.g. you've been waiting 100+ years for 1qwertyuiopBBBBBBOOOOO but your grandson gets 1qwertyuiopBBBBBZZZZZ instead?

Vanity gen brute forces using the given split public key. When it gets the correct solution, it'll produce your part public key and part private key. Give the private key combine with their part private key and the address will be as defined in the pattern.

I see so it works differently from bitcrack then? because the biggest issue with bitcrack was the developer never wanted to add randomness so it would start at a specified sequence and work its way up +1, +1 etc etc
which never made sense to me because users with million + database would all be going through the same numbers so duplicated effort

if Vanitysearch really generates the sequences in calculation randomly that's a big advantage.

Also i didn't understand what you mean by part private key. So in the example of "1qwertyuiop" VanitySearch shows this will take more than 150 years, and the other user wanted to split the effort. But my question is since this is just a partial public key there's no guarantee it will find the exact public key he's looking for in 150 years. It might find a key with last few digits different from what he wants, the only way to get the exact public key is to submit the full public key but then that will change from 150 year estimate to millions.

The author of Bitcrack didn't specifically develop Bitcrack to be used by a pool or a combined effort; so while you speak of "duplicated effort", I don't think that is exact.  He created the program for individuals to search for keys specifically tied to the 100 BTC puzzle/challenge.

So it's up to people to tweak the code or use it in a way to not duplicate effort, like the pool at ttd...effort is not duplicated because users are assigned different ranges to work on.

Adding randomness, to start at a specified sequence...what does that mean? The point of randomness should or could mean not knowing what key the program starts with, or each thread generates/starts at random keys.  I have modified a version of Bitcrack where each GPU thread generates a random key, and then starts searching sequentially from that key. And you can also tell the program to "regenerate" every x amount of keys searched.  

Vanity generates the random base key, but then sequentially (and inverse) searches for xyz prefix. User can use the rekey function to generate a new random base key.

I guess you're right, for it's intended purposes it does the job correctly. Is your version of Bitcrack available publicly or on Github to try? I've attempted something similar, currently i have a python script that generates random hex and feeds it to bitcrack (similar like a batch script) so it will open bitcrack then run for 10 minutes with random x characters changed then repeat etc etc with the option of choosing to randomize the x number of characters from beginning or from the end. So it's a semi random solution since the sharting hash is changed every 10 minutes but bitcrack still runs sequentially for each starting point which i can do nothing about

That's similar to what I did with Bitcrack; I posted it all in that thread, python to create the random range, etc. The version I have has not been released. I have ran it numerous times and it feels like it should hit the private key but to no avail lol! I'm away from main PC for a few days but when I get back I may clean it up and post it. I can change bit range but the one I do have is set up specifically for the 64 bit range. I've tested it at 48 bit range (smaller range just to make sure it worked, and it found key everytime) but the 64 bit range is a beast, for brute force, sequentially or random

[hotala]

guys is "https://github.com/Telariust/VanitySearch-bitcrack" like Plutus ? i mean for guys who want just to generate random privat key and compare it with your ready Adress list (.txt) ? or VanitySearch request something else ?

[bangbumbang]

Try remove all compute_XX and sm_XX in line #63 VanitySearch.vcxproj and try to add only compute_86,sm_86. In new line after #156 in file /gpu/GPUEngine.cu add "{0x86,  82},"
Now youcan try compile in Windows. In Visual Studio you must select ReleaseX64
By the way: You can try set in command line when you try start searching parameter -g 1920,512 and check is it better than before? if yes - you can try to search the best value in place when now is 1920. If it not work - change 512 to 256.

Sorry for bad value of this post but i add them from phone😉
I hope that tips was help solve your issue.

Sorry 4 the late answer, i was gone..
and thank u very much! i will try this in the coming days..

Apparently JeanLucPons is busy with other things - which I quite understand.

Updated VanitySearch to support the latest NVIDIA architecture.
Please here is the link:

https://github.com/zielar2/VanitySearch

IMPORTANT! To compile you need the latest CUDA Toolkit, version 11.1!
I have already compiled that for all: https://github.com/zielar2/VanitySearch/releases/download/1.19.2/VanitySearch.exe

Let me know if it helped and show off your performance.
Please let me know any other users that all work or if you find any issues.

Thank you too, great work !

will try this too in the coming days..
did u adjust for the new arcitecture (2 fp32 elements in one unit) or did you do something else?

with old code unter linux i got 3800-4400 MKeys/s but dont know if that is really representative with the old code..

quick try with your exe did not work unfotunately will try code in a few days

VanitySearch.exe -r 1000000 -t 0 -gpu -gpuId 0 -g 656,128 -o found_0.txt 1112BqXVUXqvNmhUVrP3spvpqea37uzxvt
VanitySearch v1.19
Difficulty: 1461501637330902918203684832716283019655932542976
Search: 1112BqXVUXqvNmhUVrP3spvpqea37uzxvt [Compressed]
Start Thu Jan  7 17:41:45 2021
Base Key: Randomly changed every 1000000 Mkeys
Number of CPU thread: 0
GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 3090 (82x128 cores) Grid(656x128)
[3795.19 Mkey/s][GPU 3795.19 Mkey/s][Total 2^32.85][Prob 0.0%][50% in 8.46417e+30y][Found 0]  GPUEngine: Launch: an illegal memory access was encountered

its the same grid size the -check option uses...

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 3090 (82x128 cores) Grid(656x128)
Seed: 1610037863
2.779 GigaKey/sec
ComputeKeys() found 15832 items , CPU check...

reducing the grid dramatically does not seem to help

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 3090 (82x128 cores) Grid(128x32)
[818.33 Mkey/s][GPU 818.33 Mkey/s][Total 2^31.63][Prob 0.0%][50% in 3.92544e+31y][Found 0]  GPUEngine: Launch: an illegal memory access was encountered

trying multiple addresses still brings

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 3090 (82x128 cores) Grid(656x128)
GPUEngine: Launch: misaligned address

so i compiled under ubuntu 20 with cuda 11.1 and g++-9
working exept addresses.. here an example with one address.. when i shorten the address by 6 characters it's working but not with one complete or even more than one address

./VanitySearch -t 0 -gpu -gpuId 0 -g 736,256 -o found_btcfuck.txt 1121WxDoSHcbACJY1ykvevxHfwNw
VanitySearch v1.19
Difficulty: 164888818499126885406117494769938638116436836352
Search: 1121WxDoSHcbACJY1ykvevxHfwNw [Compressed]
Start Fri Jan  8 00:54:30 2021
Base Key: 513980ECDA0075E843B9ABE92927DC8F4903CF80B0E38583DEE9032F14C94D02
Number of CPU thread: 0
GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 3090 (82x128 cores) Grid(736x256)
[3906.26 Mkey/s][GPU 3906.26 Mkey/s][Total 2^36.45][Prob 0.0%][50% in 9.27788e+29y][Found 0]

./VanitySearch -t 0 -gpu -gpuId 0 -g 736,256 -o found_btcfuck.txt 1121WxDoSHcbACJY1ykvevxHfwNwshPpFk
VanitySearch v1.19
Difficulty: 1461501637330902918203684832716283019655932542976
Search: 1121WxDoSHcbACJY1ykvevxHfwNwshPpFk [Compressed]
Start Fri Jan  8 00:55:21 2021
Base Key: 584FBD42125487E359F90EE6168A4AC1AA13CE2E88C203EF9A2C397283D9FBDA
Number of CPU thread: 0
GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 3090 (82x128 cores) Grid(736x256)
GPUEngine: Launch: an illegal memory access was encountered

[WhyFhy]

Its funny
The 1qwertyuiop problem was up for years , and it wasnt solved yet its disappeared.

1.2 BTC bounty vanished unsolved?
Refunding the bounty is theft to the problem solvers
Anyone else see this? I literally just mentioned working it a couple weeks ago and another member even benched it.

[WanderingPhilospher]

Its funny
The 1qwertyuiop problem was up for years , and it wasnt solved yet its disappeared.

1.2 BTC bounty vanished unsolved?
Refunding the bounty is theft to the problem solvers
Anyone else see this? I literally just mentioned working it a couple weeks ago and another member even benched it.

Which 1.2 bounty are you speaking of?