VanitySearch (Yet another address prefix finder)

[UsherTechs]

https://ushertechs.com/the-bitcoinvanitygen-scam

[1715171143]

1715171143

[bigvito19]

Almost all the work is now gone also along with the 1qwertyuiop.


https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork
https://vanitypool.appspot.com/solvedWork

[NotATether]

Almost all the work is now gone also along with the 1qwertyuiop.

What's the URL of that site?

Is lavishness some kind of measure of how active this solution is? I don't understand why it would have an additive and a multiplicative lavishness, not to mention mining ratio which isn't even a metric in Vanitysearch.

[bigvito19]

Almost all the work is now gone also along with the 1qwertyuiop.

What's the URL of that site?

Is lavishness some kind of measure of how active this solution is? I don't understand why it would have an additive and a multiplicative lavishness, not to mention mining ratio which isn't even a metric in Vanitysearch.

https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork

[ranochigo]

What's the URL of that site?

Is lavishness some kind of measure of how active this solution is? I don't understand why it would have an additive and a multiplicative lavishness, not to mention mining ratio which isn't even a metric in Vanitysearch.

You'll find their formula here: https://vanitypool.appspot.com/faq

It's not strictly speaking a mining pool since it doesn't split the rewards among those who works for it. It was very overpriced then and even more overpriced now, if you want any solutions. It's just basically a site for those who are interested in earning from helping others to generate their vanity address with split key generation. It's pretty dead nowadays.

[WhyFhy]

I PMed ThePiachu , said original requestor wanted it back and he honored it. But gave no heads up to those of us working it.

I'll no longer be taking parts in these due to this

https://web.archive.org/web/20130127032850/https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork

[Kostelooscoin]

Hello is it possible to search only in 5H private keys?

[NotATether]

Hello is it possible to search only in 5H private keys?

It seems that you are asking if Vanitysearch can find prefixes of private keys.

Using https://www.dcode.fr/base-58-cipher to convert between addresses and public keys, the smallest public key possible is  80000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000. All mainnet public keys have to start with a leading "80" or else their base58 addresses, and by extension their private keys, will be invalid too.

This public key corresponds to the address 5HpHagT65TZzG1PH3CSu63k8DbpvD8s5ip4nEB3kEsreAbmahZy.

The largest base58 address that still starts with 5h is 5Hzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, whose public key is  
801853E65BF4DDC28AA8C27A71F65671928ED6E1D612946BB3E94B8B36E5E9FFFFFFFFFFFF.

So you'd need to find a way to search only the public keys between:

Code:

80000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
801853E65BF4DDC28AA8C27A71F65671928ED6E1D612946BB3E94B8B36E5E9FFFFFFFFFFFF

Vanitysearch cannot search between ranges of public keys, so therefore you can't choose which private keys it will search in either.

[Kostelooscoin]

Where is the file that generates the private keys?

[NotATether]

Where is the file that generates the private keys?

Sorry, I missed this post. When VanitySearch finds a private key, it prints the public key, and the private key WIF and HEX to standard output, and also to whatever file name you passed if you used the -o option.

[WhyFhy]

The last 2 weeks or so I've been getting a message that say this app can't run on your PC,to find a version for your pc check with the software publisher.(windows 10)
The only workaround I've found is a system restore. even then Ill run the program a few times offline and still get the issue after a few restarts of the cmd window.

Elevating everything did not work, the only factor I can really think it would be is KB4023057 or windows 2004 update idk.

I've use the same program since mid 2019 with no issues until this last week or 2

[NotATether]

The last 2 weeks or so I've been getting a message that say this app can't run on your PC,to find a version for your pc check with the software publisher.(windows 10)
The only workaround I've found is a system restore. even then Ill run the program a few times offline and still get the issue after a few restarts of the cmd window.

Elevating everything did not work, the only factor I can really think it would be is KB4023057 or windows 2004 update idk.

I've use the same program since mid 2019 with no issues until this last week or 2

It's definitely an issue related to the libraries it was compiled with. But since the only additional libraries it uses is CUDA then it has to be an issue of a Windows 10 breaking compatibility with CUDA (8, since that's the one distributed on Github ??)

Note: The current relase has been compiled with CUDA SDK 10.0, if you have a different release of the CUDA SDK, you may need to update CUDA SDK paths in VanitySearch.vcxproj using a text editor.

So maybe stuff built with CUDA 10, including possibly the other VanitySearch .sln, no longer works. Or it could apply to CUDA 8 instead, I'm not sure.

Did you check Windows Event Log if it generates an event about this? The extra info in there will help identify the culprit.

[adaris]

I cannot understand what exactly this command gives me. how exactly the search algorithm goes?

VanitySearch.exe -t 0 -gpu -gpuId 0 -g 24,128 -i all_btc_balance.txt -o output.txt

He starts with a hex key? and ascending searches?

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

or randomly generates a hex key? and ascending searches?

634C5BDB134FBFDD1D32D9E0922D664CA22A9339466D4621D26D3C9D838C2B7C

[WanderingPhilospher]

I cannot understand what exactly this command gives me. how exactly the search algorithm goes?

VanitySearch.exe -t 0 -gpu -gpuId 0 -g 24,128 -i all_btc_balance.txt -o output.txt

He starts with a hex key? and ascending searches?

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

or randomly generates a hex key? and ascending searches?

634C5BDB134FBFDD1D32D9E0922D664CA22A9339466D4621D26D3C9D838C2B7C

Yes, a random "Base Key" and ascending "sequential" search, but also checks the symmetry addresses and endorphisms.

[NotATether]

I cannot understand what exactly this command gives me. how exactly the search algorithm goes?

VanitySearch.exe -t 0 -gpu -gpuId 0 -g 24,128 -i all_btc_balance.txt -o output.txt

He starts with a hex key? and ascending searches?

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001

or randomly generates a hex key? and ascending searches?

634C5BDB134FBFDD1D32D9E0922D664CA22A9339466D4621D26D3C9D838C2B7C

On CPU, VanitySearch can generate a random 256-bit starting private key every rekey MKeys, and add CPU_GRP_SIZE/2 to the key to get the final starting key. But this is not enabled by default because rekey is set to 0. That means it will start with a fixed starting key. From diving into the code I found that it starts with 0

Now since rekey is hardcoded to 0 by default, it's going to add the starting point to the thread ID of the CPU (which VanitySearch gives it) shifted left by 64 bits. So each thread will have starting points at least 2^64 apart from each other.

CPU_GRP_Size is set to 1024 and if you're familiar with how GPUs assign several points per thread, VanitySearch's CPU implementation does something similar.

If you see "Base Key: Randomly changed every x Mkeys" in the output then that's the value of rekey and it's generating random starting keys. On he other hand if you just see "Base Key:" and then a number then a static key (0x0 in this case) is being used.

In Vanity.cpp:

Code:

void VanitySearch::getCPUStartingKey(int thId,Int& key,Point& startP) {

  if (rekey > 0) {
    key.Rand(256);
  } else {
    key.Set(&startKey);
    Int off((int64_t)thId);
    off.ShiftL(64);
    key.Add(&off);
  }
  Int km(&key);
  km.Add((uint64_t)CPU_GRP_SIZE / 2);
  startP = secp->ComputePublicKey(&km);
  if(startPubKeySpecified)
   startP = secp->AddDirect(startP,startPubKey);

}

We have similar code for getting the GPU starting key. Same 256-bit random key if rekey is non-zero, otherwise we use the thread and block numbers to get a starting key for each CUDA thread:

Code:

void VanitySearch::getGPUStartingKeys(int thId, int groupSize, int nbThread, Int *keys, Point *p) {

  for (int i = 0; i < nbThread; i++) {
    if (rekey > 0) {
      keys[i].Rand(256);
    } else {
      keys[i].Set(&startKey);
      Int offT((uint64_t)i);
      offT.ShiftL(80);
      Int offG((uint64_t)thId);
      offG.ShiftL(112);
      keys[i].Add(&offT);
      keys[i].Add(&offG);
    }
    Int k(keys + i);
    // Starting key is at the middle of the group
    k.Add((uint64_t)(groupSize / 2));
    p[i] = secp->ComputePublicKey(&k);
    if (startPubKeySpecified)
      p[i] = secp->AddDirect(p[i], startPubKey);
  }

}

[escobol]

There is a way to get custom middle? (or end / but its cheksum)

[adaris]

And since I understood if I add a key -r 10 the algorithm begins to generate keys in a random 10Mkey/s and check with a list of existing addresses.
it turns into a game who is more successful in this version of the universe 

VanitySearch.exe -t 0 -gpu -gpuId 0 -g 24,128 -r 10 -i btc.txt -o output.txt
[Loading input file 100.0%]
VanitySearch v1.19
[Building lookup16 100.0%]
[Building lookup32 100.0%]
Search: 24381246 addresses (Lookup size 65536,[287,3141]) [Compressed]
Start Wed Feb 17 17:57:44 2021
Base Key: Randomly changed every 10 Mkeys
Number of CPU thread: 0
GPU: GPU #0 GeForce GT 1030 (3x128 cores) Grid(24x128)

Warning, 41264 items lost
Hint: Search with less prefixes, less threads (-g) or increase maxFound (-m)
[9.28 Mkey/s][GPU 9.28 Mkey/s][Total 2^31.77][Prob 0.0%][50% in 3.46183e+33y][Found 0]

I think this is better than generating one key and searching nearby in a small range of matches.


my benchmark on GPU GeForce GT 1030

C:\Users\adaris\Desktop\btc\VanitySearch>VanitySearch.exe -check
GetBase10() Results OK
Add() Results OK : 427.350 MegaAdd/sec
Mult() Results OK : 31.716 MegaMult/sec
Div() Results OK : 4.322 MegaDiv/sec
R1=1000003D1
R2=1000007A2000E90A1
Field characteristic size: 256bits
ModInv()/ModExp() Results OK
ModInv() Edge cases Results OK
.Avg = 6.13
ModInv() Results OK : 445.968 KiloInv/sec
ModInv() cycles : 6503.24
ModSqrt() Results OK !
IntGroup.ModInv() Results OK : 5.641 MegaInv/sec
ModMulK1() Results OK : 27.392 MegaMult/sec
ModSquareK1() Results OK : 31.616 MegaSqr/sec
ModInv() Cost : 141.8 S
ModMulK1order() Results OK : 3.785 MegaMult/sec
Check Generator :OK
Check Double :OK
Check Add :OK
Check GenKey :OK
Adress : 15t3Nt1zyMETkHbjJTTshxLnqPzQvAtdCe OK!
Adress : 1BoatSLRHtKNngkdXEeobR76b53LETtpyT OK!
Adress : 1Test6BNjSJC5qwYXsjwKVLvz7DpfLehy OK!
Adress : 16S5PAsGZ8VFM1CRGGLqm37XHrp46f6CTn OK!
Adress : 1Tst2RwMxZn9cYY5mQhCdJic3JJrK7Fq7 OK!
Adress : 3CyQYcByvcWK8BkYJabBS82yDLNWt6rWSx OK!
Adress : 31to1KQe67YjoDfYnwFJThsGeQcFhVDM5Q OK!
Adress : bc1q6tqytpg06uhmtnhn9s4f35gkt8yya5a24dptmn OK!
Check Calc PubKey (full) 1ViViGLEawN27xRzGrEhhYPQrZiTKvKLo :OK
Check Calc PubKey (even) 385cR5DM96n1HvBDMzLHPYcw89fZAXULJP:OK
Check Calc PubKey (odd) 18aPiLmTow7Xgu96msrDYvSSWweCvB9oBA:OK
GPU: GPU #0 GeForce GT 1030 (3x128 cores) Grid(24x128)
Seed: 1613577059
61.751 MegaKey/sec
ComputeKeys() found 611 items , CPU check...
GPU/CPU check OK

[MisterCooper]

Can I specify the desired search range for private keys in "VanitySearch"? I've seen BitCrack has --keyspace but I'm most interested in "VanitySearch" from @Jean_Luc.

[WanderingPhilospher]

Can I specify the desired search range for private keys in "VanitySearch"? I've seen BitCrack has --keyspace but I'm most interested in "VanitySearch" from @Jean_Luc.

Not without tweaking the existing code

[MisterCooper]

Can I specify the desired search range for private keys in "VanitySearch"? I've seen BitCrack has --keyspace but I'm most interested in "VanitySearch" from @Jean_Luc.

Not without tweaking the existing code

Please tell me how to make "VanitySearch" generate random private keys in the range of no more than 2 ^ 180 keys. I'm not good at C ++ programming, but what needs to be changed in the "Random.cpp" code to get this result?