== Bitcoin challenge transaction: ~1000 BTC total bounty to solvers! ==UPDATED==

[MrlostinBTC]

I'm currently checking apps that I haven't checked before... and that's how I found PubHunt. I entered the 29 closest unresolved addresses without pubkey in the input... This way I achieve a scan of 6400Gkeys/s . What are the estimates that a pubkeys lookup for 29 addresses with this method and this program at this speed will yield the intended expectations more than a traditional key lookup? What are the real chances of success and effectiveness of this method?

Hi Zielar
Waouhh impressive this speed! If you could choose the beginning and end of the search range, you could find pubkey #66 between 2 and 4 months. On the other hand the search is carried out randomly it makes random hashes on the PK of #64 #66 #67 #68 #69 #71 and #72 it can be faster as well as much longer depending on luck. Too bad this program could be largely optimized like choosing the hash range #66 as well as the random or sequential mode with your speed you could come across #66 in 1 month or 2 depending on luck.

Edit
Looking more closely at the operation of this utility and your speed, the proba are these
in 10 days on all the beaches by inserting the 6 pubkeys (I calculated for the first 6 # not 29)  you have a one in 148 chance of having one of the keys
in 20 days 1/74  1.35%
in 40 days 1/37  2.75%
in 80 days 1/18  5.5%
in 160 days 1/9  11%
in 320 days 1/4  25%
it remains arbitrary because luck can enormously speed up the process

Is there any way to specify the bit range in this program ? I am newbie so any help would be appreciated
Thanks

I was trying to figure out a way to see if PubHunt even works. It is not easy to test on lower complexity keys. Would also be nice to see current key being worked on. So far I have.

https://github.com/Chail35/PubHuntRange

PubHunt.cpp
Line 330

         printf("\r[%s] [GPU: %.2f MK/s] [T: %s (%d bit)] [F: %d] %02hhx %016llx %llu  ",

%016llx should be the starting key. However it looks like this. and only upldates every few trillion keys.

[00:00:06] [GPU: 4316.00 MK/s] [T: 25,904,021,504 (35 bit)] [F: 0] a4 00007fffb46dd420 17179869184

Many thanks to Chail35 for recently updating this fork!

[WanderingPhilospher]

I'm currently checking apps that I haven't checked before... and that's how I found PubHunt. I entered the 29 closest unresolved addresses without pubkey in the input... This way I achieve a scan of 6400Gkeys/s . What are the estimates that a pubkeys lookup for 29 addresses with this method and this program at this speed will yield the intended expectations more than a traditional key lookup? What are the real chances of success and effectiveness of this method?

Hi Zielar
Waouhh impressive this speed! If you could choose the beginning and end of the search range, you could find pubkey #66 between 2 and 4 months. On the other hand the search is carried out randomly it makes random hashes on the PK of #64 #66 #67 #68 #69 #71 and #72 it can be faster as well as much longer depending on luck. Too bad this program could be largely optimized like choosing the hash range #66 as well as the random or sequential mode with your speed you could come across #66 in 1 month or 2 depending on luck.

Edit
Looking more closely at the operation of this utility and your speed, the proba are these
in 10 days on all the beaches by inserting the 6 pubkeys (I calculated for the first 6 # not 29)  you have a one in 148 chance of having one of the keys
in 20 days 1/74  1.35%
in 40 days 1/37  2.75%
in 80 days 1/18  5.5%
in 160 days 1/9  11%
in 320 days 1/4  25%
it remains arbitrary because luck can enormously speed up the process

Is there any way to specify the bit range in this program ? I am newbie so any help would be appreciated
Thanks

I was trying to figure out a way to see if PubHunt even works. It is not easy to test on lower complexity keys. Would also be nice to see current key being worked on. So far I have.

https://github.com/Chail35/PubHuntRange

PubHunt.cpp
Line 330

         printf("\r[%s] [GPU: %.2f MK/s] [T: %s (%d bit)] [F: %d] %02hhx %016llx %llu  ",

%016llx should be the starting key. However it looks like this. and only upldates every few trillion keys.

[00:00:06] [GPU: 4316.00 MK/s] [T: 25,904,021,504 (35 bit)] [F: 0] a4 00007fffb46dd420 17179869184

Many thanks to Chail35 for recently updating this fork!

I am confused about the fork you provided the link for above. Confused as in, if it is working in a range, then there is no difference between this forked program and keyhunt-cuda.

The original pubhunt did not work in a range, it generated random public keys to try and link to a h160/address. Which, if you do the math, meant there could be close to 2^96 possibilities. But now, shrinking the range down to 66 bit or 67 bit, etc., makes that number more than likely just 1. 1 match compared to 2^96 possible matches is a big difference.

[MrlostinBTC]

I think it was a attempt, work in progress. Does not function correctly. That got me started on attempting to display the current key it was working on as it was running. As well as attempting to modifiy it to start with the fisrt 20 or so known keys for tests. I know of no current Pubkey search program for the puzzles with GPU. The upside of GPU searching for just the pubkey is the speed for video cards seems to be x2 the speed with more then 20 hash160 addresses. More fun right now then anything, always trying to learn. Based on the random output. This program in this way will never find any key. As 0000 is always front running. Maybe limited by uint64_t?

Again target is to break pubkey hash, not privkey

[fecell]

Again target is to break pubkey hash, not privkey

I remember there was information about how the keys were generated.
If anyone remembers where it is in the topics, please write link here.
It is important to understand whether a 256-bit key was generated and “cut off”, or whether private keys of the required bit size were initially generated for each address.
This is important for estimating entropy.

[kTimesG]

I think it was a attempt, work in progress. Does not function correctly. That got me started on attempting to display the current key it was working on as it was running. As well as attempting to modifiy it to start with the fisrt 20 or so known keys for tests. I know of no current Pubkey search program for the puzzles with GPU. The upside of GPU searching for just the pubkey is the speed for video cards seems to be x2 the speed with more then 20 hash160 addresses. More fun right now then anything, always trying to learn. Based on the random output. This program in this way will never find any key. As 0000 is always front running. Maybe limited by uint64_t?

Again target is to break pubkey hash, not privkey

Breaking the address (pubkey hash) automatically implies searching through the entire field range (~ 2^96 pub keys per address, in the 2^256 field)
Breaking the key searches through the key range.

TL;DR it makes no sense to try to first break the pub key in hope of using that later to find the private key. And it also doesn't make sense to break the pub key if you constrain the search to the private keys range, because this is equivalent to basically finding the solution, not breaking anything, but solving the puzzle.

[faiyaz_crysp]

I'm currently checking apps that I haven't checked before... and that's how I found PubHunt. I entered the 29 closest unresolved addresses without pubkey in the input... This way I achieve a scan of 6400Gkeys/s . What are the estimates that a pubkeys lookup for 29 addresses with this method and this program at this speed will yield the intended expectations more than a traditional key lookup? What are the real chances of success and effectiveness of this method?

Hi Zielar
Waouhh impressive this speed! If you could choose the beginning and end of the search range, you could find pubkey #66 between 2 and 4 months. On the other hand the search is carried out randomly it makes random hashes on the PK of #64 #66 #67 #68 #69 #71 and #72 it can be faster as well as much longer depending on luck. Too bad this program could be largely optimized like choosing the hash range #66 as well as the random or sequential mode with your speed you could come across #66 in 1 month or 2 depending on luck.

Edit
Looking more closely at the operation of this utility and your speed, the proba are these
in 10 days on all the beaches by inserting the 6 pubkeys (I calculated for the first 6 # not 29)  you have a one in 148 chance of having one of the keys
in 20 days 1/74  1.35%
in 40 days 1/37  2.75%
in 80 days 1/18  5.5%
in 160 days 1/9  11%
in 320 days 1/4  25%
it remains arbitrary because luck can enormously speed up the process

I was trying to figure out a way to see if PubHunt even works. It is not easy to test on lower complexity keys. Would also be nice to see current key being worked on. So far I have.

https://github.com/Chail35/PubHuntRange

PubHunt.cpp
Line 330

         printf("\r[%s] [GPU: %.2f MK/s] [T: %s (%d bit)] [F: %d] %02hhx %016llx %llu  ",

%016llx should be the starting key. However it looks like this. and only upldates every few trillion keys.

[00:00:06] [GPU: 4316.00 MK/s] [T: 25,904,021,504 (35 bit)] [F: 0] a4 00007fffb46dd420 17179869184

Many thanks to Chail35 for recently updating this fork!

I am confused about the fork you provided the link for above. Confused as in, if it is working in a range, then there is no difference between this forked program and keyhunt-cuda.

The original pubhunt did not work in a range, it generated random public keys to try and link to a h160/address. Which, if you do the math, meant there could be close to 2^96 possibilities. But now, shrinking the range down to 66 bit or 67 bit, etc., makes that number more than likely just 1. 1 match compared to 2^96 possible matches is a big difference.

Hi,

In the usage example in github thhe used wrong start range and end range , seems its missing 1 digits.
KEY RANGE : 0x2000000000000000 - 0x3fffffffffffffff

If i enter the correct start range for the 66 puzzle address -sr 20000000000000000 -er 3ffffffffffffffff the program shows KEY RANGE : 0xffffffffffffffff - 0xffffffffffffffff
even if i change the -sr and -er to a custom short range i.e -sr 215fffffffffffff -er 215fffffffffffff it seems to show the same status on key range as KEY RANGE : 0xffffffffffffffff - 0xffffffffffffffff
can you have a look ? also is it possible to update the code so it shows the status of the current keys it's working on ?

https://snipboard.io/lpYitb.jpg

[kafi_nist]

Guyz im working on these puzzle since 2y ago i never shared anything but i have to say please rush to find answers people im coming to solve all of them soon

The creator lied 🤥 there is a pattern which is made by superrr smart way i just found it by a silly mistake i shocked asffffff just need time and some more mathematics to solve more but soon all gonna be solve ))

Just for making history im gonna put my address here and share this post

Thanks all 🧩

Good luck.

I will transfer funds to here : bc1q4kp7qr5ylr2vnylvqqs57mz4e4hpq28kkgh40y

[kTimesG]

Guyz im working on these puzzle since 2y ago i never shared anything but i have to say please rush to find answers people im coming to solve all of them soon

The creator lied 🤥 there is a pattern which is made by superrr smart way i just found it by a silly mistake i shocked asffffff just need time and some more mathematics to solve more but soon all gonna be solve ))

k pls just hurry up so we can call it a day

[DarthStroyer]

Guyz im working on these puzzle since 2y ago i never shared anything but i have to say please rush to find answers people im coming to solve all of them soon

The creator lied 🤥 there is a pattern which is made by superrr smart way i just found it by a silly mistake i shocked asffffff just need time and some more mathematics to solve more but soon all gonna be solve ))

If you really solved this, then congratulations. However, I'd be careful about making such claims. I've been at this on and off since 2019, and on several occasions I've thought I'd found mathematical patterns, and on a few of those occasions I've even been convinced, but none of them held up. I've also delved into visual patterns, on both the already claimed keys, and on the addresses.

Sadly I don't have the hardware to brute force, so pattern finding is essentially my only option. Nevertheless, I have my computer trying one of the so far unclaimed keys. Based on the number of keys it tries every minute, I will, statistically, be at it for about a billion years.

[vlad3377]

Hi!
When will you find the private key?
How to withdraw?
Through what program?
Bitcrack works
(66)
First number 9

[Asmodeus_Zero]

Hi. Are you sure you've found the key to the still unresolved address?

[albert0bsd]

I will transfer funds to here : bc1q4kp7qr5ylr2vnylvqqs57mz4e4hpq28kkgh40y

Doit... LOL isn't the first time that somebody claims that. And all others also failed to do that.

There is a lot of Newbie accounts with only one single message spamming the post recently, fuck them all

[DarthStroyer]

I will transfer funds to here : bc1q4kp7qr5ylr2vnylvqqs57mz4e4hpq28kkgh40y

Doit... LOL isn't the first time that somebody claims that. And all others also failed to do that.

There is a lot of Newbie accounts with only one single message spamming the post recently, fuck them all

Not that I have ever claimed to have solved this, and in spite of being a newbie I'm just as amused as you are by those who do claim to have done it.
And yes, I do work on pattern finding (mathematical as well as visual) and statistical approaches, and have done since I first discovered this challenge in 2019. With the hardware and the budget available to me, brute forcing would be ridiculous. A billion years or more to find a single key. Sure I could stumble on it tomorrow. But I could do that with pattern finding and statistics as well, and even if I do not, I find trying to think of new ways to discover patterns or statistical relations intellectually stimulating, and even if I don't get a single sat out of this, I may have gained some insights into things I might use elsewhere.
That said, given that I'm a newbie on this forum, and that before this one I've only posted one message, who will you send to fuck me? Please say she's a gorgeous brunette.

[qingsen]

Hi, I am new here, and I have read a lot regarding the ECDLP topic and try to understand how does it works, may I ask you all what computational power does the puzzles 130 needed to be solved? I am curious whether people will try to rent for GPU and solve for #130. Thanks.

[holy_ship]

what computational power does the puzzles 130 needed to be solved

if you have 56core/256GB server, you'll check about 12 exakeys per sec

2^129 / 11344588059320129643 / 3600*24 = ?

after 1_902_338_144_733  years AT MOST you'll become rich, but with this probability 1/680564733841876926926749214863536422912 you'll find PK in first second. Feel lucky? (haha)

p.s. if you pay $200 per month for server, you'll pay 1902338144733*200*12 = ?

4_565_611_547_359_200 dollars

so, it's only reasonable if you do not pay for server

[benjaniah]

Does anyone know where I can find vanitysearch for sm89/ccap89. All the links to vanitysearch on the first page give me 404 errors. Thanks

[fecell]

what computational power does the puzzles 130 needed to be solved

if you have 56core/256GB server, you'll check about 12 exakeys per sec

2^129 / 11344588059320129643 / 3600*24 = ?

after 1_902_338_144_733  years AT MOST you'll become rich, but with this probability 1/680564733841876926926749214863536422912 you'll find PK in first second. Feel lucky? (haha)

p.s. if you pay $200 per month for server, you'll pay 1902338144733*200*12 = ?

4_565_611_547_359_200 dollars

so, it's only reasonable if you do not pay for server

this is true if you go through all the values ​​without taking into account entropy.

Of course, if you try to generate a random number of 10 bits a billion times, you can get the number 0. But if you try to generate a random number of 66 bits, it becomes impossible to get the number 0. In this way, you need to ignore values ​​that with the maximum probability could not be a private key.

[kTimesG]

what computational power does the puzzles 130 needed to be solved

if you have 56core/256GB server, you'll check about 12 exakeys per sec

2^129 / 11344588059320129643 / 3600*24 = ?

after 1_902_338_144_733  years AT MOST you'll become rich, but with this probability 1/680564733841876926926749214863536422912 you'll find PK in first second. Feel lucky? (haha)

p.s. if you pay $200 per month for server, you'll pay 1902338144733*200*12 = ?

4_565_611_547_359_200 dollars

so, it's only reasonable if you do not pay for server

this is true if you go through all the values ​​without taking into account entropy.

Of course, if you try to generate a random number of 10 bits a billion times, you can get the number 0. But if you try to generate a random number of 66 bits, it becomes impossible to get the number 0. In this way, you need to ignore values ​​that with the maximum probability could not be a private key.

For 10 bits and a billion random trials you'll get the number 0 around 976562 times, on average.

If we replace each possible value from 0 to 2**66 - 1 with some emoticon for a thing in the universe, what exactly makes 0 to be more special than some other value? The values are just labels, it makes zero sense to discriminate them. The only valid affirmation you have is that there is a 100% chance that some random value in some 2**66 set of elements is contained in the set. It doesn't matter how you look at them.

Also, it would be weird as well if somehow the maximum probability solution (some value with maximum entropy and with exactly 33 bits of zeros and 33 bits of ones, in some arrangement that has the least possible compression form) is the one that's correct. So, why not exclude stuff from the other end of this mindset as well? It's like: if you throw a coin in the air 100 times, chances are very low you'll get a 50/50, but still, these are the maximum chances as well.

[bitcoinpuzzles621]

Does anyone still happen to have the public keys for all of the solved puzzles?   Like starting from puzzle number 1 upto number 65 for example?   Just was curious since usually only the private key is listed after a puzzle is solved.  But knowing what the public keys were helps greatly too.  Maybe you will reply here later if you have that list of values,  thanks

[benjaniah]

Does anyone still happen to have the public keys for all of the solved puzzles?   Like starting from puzzle number 1 upto number 65 for example?   Just was curious since usually only the private key is listed after a puzzle is solved.  But knowing what the public keys were helps greatly too.  Maybe you will reply here later if you have that list of values,  thanks

They're all on page 1 of this thread  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5218972.0