Short Adresses , how to check it?

[goldenlord]

Hi,

how can i check short crypto adresses?

Like:

LbWKXCVe   for LTC
1EEoqxSat3    for BTC
0xF22c60    for ETH


All blockchain Explorers that ive tryed dont work anymore with this short addresses...

[1714290761]

1714290761

[1714290761]

1714290761

[1714290761]

1714290761

[ABCbits]

Hi,

how can i check short crypto adresses?

Like:

LbWKXCVe   for LTC
1EEoqxSat3    for BTC
0xF22c60    for ETH


All blockchain Explorers that ive tryed dont work anymore with this short addresses...

Mempool.space block explorer offer auto complete when you doesn't type whole address. You'll have look elsewhere for different coin though. And most importantly, those short incomplete address is deemed invalid.

[NeuroticFish]

Also walletexplorer.com, while I don't recommend it as a block explorer to use, it's good at finding addresses based on "firstbits".
For your bitcoin address it returns this:

[DaveF]

Hi,

how can i check short crypto adresses?

Like:

LbWKXCVe   for LTC
1EEoqxSat3    for BTC
0xF22c60    for ETH


All blockchain Explorers that ive tryed dont work anymore with this short addresses...

Keep in mind with the shorter ones people with enough computing power can generate them with a little work and time

1EEoqxSat3 followed by the rest of an address can also be 1EEoqxSat3 followed by the rest of another address with less then a months worth of GPU computing power. And with all the GPU rigs not doing much after ETH went PoS there are a lot of them out there not doing much.

Also I have noticed at times when using walletexplorer.com, it will give the 1st address of what it finds not all of them.
There are a lot of 1nasty addresses but it does not show all of them.

-Dave

[Charles-Tim]

Is there any good reason to be looking for complete character of an incomplete addresses? If you have your seed phrase or private key, they can generate your complete address anytime that you want it.

I have seen people on this forum looking for some missing characters of a private key, or how to decrypt a BIP38 encrypted paper wallet private key, or looking for some missing words of a seed phrase. Those are normal for obvious reasons, which is to be able to access the private key to spend the coins in connection with them.

how can i check short crypto adresses?

Is there any good reason you are looking for a way to make the incomplete characters of an address complete?

[NeuroticFish]

Is there any good reason to be looking for complete character of an incomplete addresses? If you have your seed phrase or private key, they can generate your complete address anytime that you want it.

In these cases the private key tends to stay hidden under a seal. That's because short addresses/firstbits are useful for collectible items, usually coins, where the space is very limited.
And people still want to check whether the collectible they've bought is indeed funded.

[DaveF]

Is there any good reason to be looking for complete character of an incomplete addresses? If you have your seed phrase or private key, they can generate your complete address anytime that you want it.

In these cases the private key tends to stay hidden under a seal. That's because short addresses/firstbits are useful for collectible items, usually coins, where the space is very limited.
And people still want to check whether the collectible they've bought is indeed funded.

The problems are as I said the fact that without 10+ characters of the address it is easy to generate another address with the same visible 1st bits.
Even if you have the complete address do you know what is really under that hologram: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5401502
And the ever popular you don't know if you can really trust the coin manufactures.

When BTC was $400 if some maker made 100 BTC0.1 and ran off with 10 BTC it sucked we all got pissed and went on with our day.
Now even at the $17000 price it starts to get into substantial amounts of money. Relying of 1stbits and holograms and so on is just no longer viable.

-Dave

[NeuroticFish]

The problems are as I said the fact that without 10+ characters of the address it is easy to generate another address with the same visible 1st bits.
Even if you have the complete address do you know what is really under that hologram: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5401502
And the ever popular you don't know if you can really trust the coin manufactures.

When BTC was $400 if some maker made 100 BTC0.1 and ran off with 10 BTC it sucked we all got pissed and went on with our day.
Now even at the $17000 price it starts to get into substantial amounts of money. Relying of 1stbits and holograms and so on is just no longer viable.

That's true/correct.
I've read already about manufacturers getting silent and having the coins redeeming logic based on their (now offline) website.
I think that I've read about the possibility holograms could be taken down and put back again (in some cases).
Clearly, addresses created with the same firstbits in order to mislead users is not a possibility to dismiss.

Imho collectibles are very nice even if not funded (I tend to like more the DYI ones). Funded collectibles, especially with higher amounts, tend to pose unnecessary risks.
So, again, I agree, you're fully right.


However, the topic has started with a question, not a debate on how (un)safe holograms and fistbits are. If one indeed has such a collectible, he will still want a tool to see his funds without taking down the hologram. Yes, it may not be accurate, in some cases the wrong address may be returned/checked, but I don't know of better tools.

[ABCbits]

1EEoqxSat3 followed by the rest of an address can also be 1EEoqxSat3 followed by the rest of another address with less then a months worth of GPU computing power. And with all the GPU rigs not doing much after ETH went PoS there are a lot of them out there not doing much.

Additionally, there's cheap marketplace to rent CPU/GPU such as vast.ai.

However, the topic has started with a question, not a debate on how (un)safe holograms and fistbits are. If one indeed has such a collectible, he will still want a tool to see his funds without taking down the hologram. Yes, it may not be accurate, in some cases the wrong address may be returned/checked, but I don't know of better tools.

Not exactly tool, but you could download list of funded/used address and find address based on "firstbits" either using text editor or grep command.

Code:

$ wget http://addresses.loyce.club/Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt.gz
$ gzip -dk Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt.gz
$ grep "1EEoqxSat3" Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt
1EEoqxSat3Tg6LkwEYxwHgQUtmHVn8uKwc

[fennic]

Hi,

how can i check short crypto adresses?

Like:

LbWKXCVe   for LTC
1EEoqxSat3    for BTC
0xF22c60    for ETH


All blockchain Explorers that ive tryed dont work anymore with this short addresses...

Hi bro you can check on https://www.walletexplorer.com/
This is an explorer website that will give you information what are your seeking. And I am using it from almost 2020 and it helped me a lot in many ways. You will also learn many things in your life cause more you seek more you learn.

[DaveF]

.... Yes, it may not be accurate, in some cases the wrong address may be returned/checked, but I don't know of better tools.

Sorry I didn't put it clearly, it's not that there are no better tools, it's the fact that there are no tools or even a way to be sure.

If you can't see the full address and the private key so you can verify that the private key is actually, for that address, while making sure nobody else has seen / still has the private key then you no longer have BTC.

You have a lottery ticket that may or may not have BTC in it when you finally scratch it off.

Look a handy thread that not enough people read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3315347.0

-Dave

[LoyceV]

Not exactly tool, but you could download list of funded/used address and find address based on "firstbits" either using text editor or grep command.

Code:

$ wget http://addresses.loyce.club/Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt.gz
$ gzip -dk Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt.gz
$ grep "1EEoqxSat3" Bitcoin_addresses_December_16_2022.txt
1EEoqxSat3Tg6LkwEYxwHgQUtmHVn8uKwc

To be more thorough, you shouldn't only check currently funded addresses, but all addresses: http://alladdresses.loyce.club/all_Bitcoin_addresses_ever_used_in_order_of_first_appearance.txt.gz (it's a slightly larger download (27 GB)).
I've just checked for 1EEoqxSat3, and it only shows 1EEoqxSat3Tg6LkwEYxwHgQUtmHVn8uKwc.

For Litecoin and Ethereum you can download the full data too (if you're patient enough).

[Saint-loup]

.... Yes, it may not be accurate, in some cases the wrong address may be returned/checked, but I don't know of better tools.

Sorry I didn't put it clearly, it's not that there are no better tools, it's the fact that there are no tools or even a way to be sure.

If you can't see the full address and the private key so you can verify that the private key is actually, for that address, while making sure nobody else has seen / still has the private key then you no longer have BTC.

You have a lottery ticket that may or may not have BTC in it when you finally scratch it off.

Look a handy thread that not enough people read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3315347.0

-Dave

Well this thread is more about classic scams you can get with many other goods you can purchase online unfortunately. But what you said above is interesting, for you the acceptable limit of a shortened address should be 10 characters at least. Address strings shorter than that are such risky? I mean 7+ characters is not enough according to you? Are there some figure (stastistics) about that somewhere? 

[LoyceV]

But what you said above is interesting, for you the acceptable limit of a shortened address should be 10 characters at least.

I see no point in shortening anything. It requires trusting a third party, while I'm using Bitcoin so I don't have to.

Address strings shorter than that are such risky? I mean 7+ characters is not enough according to you? Are there some figure (stastistics) about that somewhere?

I did a quick check of currently funded addresses. These are the most common "firstbits":

Code:

    533 13vs7FtkinfdQEr
    178 1MRQMyG8NXuWy8Q
    114 111111111111111
    100 18mUfVHHPB719p5
     69 15PoAPLdagVwbrm
     51 16r4jPvxVavBnYn
     51 15DBQVf9USmepuX
     42 1GQbCRKfSpv61Aw
     41 19nbKmgGAMztCiY
     40 19UjqqjXmQxyyn4
     38 19yZWbp6CkYbRgy
     38 13vs7FtkinfdQFN
     36 1B4fGbLPqKwVYMU
     36 14WCuwmL7JVDe53
     35 1GameWinnerSide
     26 1ML7gn8oxMfpSap
     26 19wBDoN7rJ9UcW2
     26 19QStptbvStgmpk
     26 16r4jPvxVavDRkq
     25 16fVWdPe5SnALYv
     25 13xUrWtr33gisFr
     24 1Nt1B3HD3MghPqr
     24 1AJKvZsPX16GigP
     24 16VFGgrSaoLKvPr
     24 16QBpnaoAz1Xs6b
     23 16m7JGEPqL3RW2d
     23 13vs7FtkinfdQFM
     22 1EQGLCYgGwiiRBx
     22 16aF7KsfBdmjvgu
     22 16Jswqk47s9PUcy
     22 157sXYpQRKuWSRu
     21 18bNsPWJ9aGbamJ
     21 183jdoiA97a8qfk
     21 14hoiMjKhVBwrTG
     20 1BXPA1djHX35pz9
     20 1B4e3UJDK5Vkeiy
     20 14Cnk6Qyt9G4Zfh
     19 1uskvGBAmMzGa4p
     19 1PtAc9fhdJHPBqM
     19 1FpRnXcCcX3ywVE
     19 18bNsNXERj1h3KD
     19 16fpd575R9oiyV2
     19 161pAYwTvhzRy5d
     18 1KsWsi7jHXte1sN
     18 1DagSW5akR6P1P4
     18 1BXPA1djHX35pyz
     18 1BEV752mACUZvEA
     18 1BERYJqWFpuYkQR
     18 18QcRiTePyNthuY
     18 1888b6fTnxeNqZ1
     18 17KTE2wt487iCPX
     18 17KGeeW7k4JTzv5
     18 147ShXWnUXq3WSg
     18 13wvPzKvNwJH9bb
     17 1wCaSFw7UjGQFJ3
     17 1CKeWxvmG6T3dFd
     17 18bNsPCTrsW4fSH
     17 17JFawv7Wre64YK
     17 16WFtzRtaYpWtyt
     17 15JWVCDKAWGF5KB
     17 14r57Eaj5d5kSbE
     17 147mhhaBkDCAEEW
     17 147SoGcj4pHywAg
     16 1h8BNZkhsPiu6EK
     16 1MhGPYe5d4ccYmB
     16 1K9DUB7Bx813oWe
     16 1HKTxLaqcbH5Gcq
     16 1DbWv9gqxSEdDd5
     16 1BRsWDnXk6N5vbr
     16 1AXGKL9ZWaxBUBa
     16 1A7kaBckgecsfbC
     16 18W1PkAxT3giXpu
     16 16PkuZhrvF2zyqr
     16 147UrgQxdJD25hX
     16 13BuDc2d1EfmeCL
     16 12rRrC5QCh1Ncp2
     16 12Bx3iADamGzzvB
     15 bc1qghzja3vxyzp
     15 1Jgn6DUbsEpZAnh
     15 19rZPxyNUcvPN7e
     15 18bNxYyP6tSEmov
     15 18bNsPKbaMQgENH
     15 17W7Xt5cDCkQYdP
     15 16WKqFnuw4dKhYx
     15 12rQMgNAMF6URj8
     15 12pkttrsneitCKz
     14 bc1qysgu4uneqzp
     14 bc1qtanrvt8jywc
     14 bc1qjkjy6y7eer0
     14 bc1qgs8z5x3ezsq
     14 bc1q8ena4prt3sx
     14 1viSGjrKU19VsHe
     14 1QFKJvAyJ1EBJ1i
     14 1L46E6NN7tN34xZ
     14 1Fb17hBohEnoGGd
     14 1DVPaHHW7BMj9k3
     14 1CaWpN2KwQzjtJ9
     14 1BDCgV8ZgmTFz8H
     14 1AEJUzcZoCJ85Ra
     14 19a2X2rrBbCgWKf
     14 18J2aaSW9btXnJx
     14 188888888888888
     14 15NoSD4F1ULYHGW
     14 13xMkEYshcCWH1E
     14 114MiTMoanBtHJe
     13 bc1qz3l4l4gag7j
     13 bc1qymlykkjex0r
     13 bc1qyl66nv06t06
     13 bc1qvvme2zmdrds
     13 bc1qpms8f82hkv9
     13 bc1qp0zms4q8agv
     13 bc1qmzdh66t2dk9
     13 bc1qldcu87xr9le
     13 bc1ql2yzwqsmelt
     13 bc1qjfd5sy2g848
     13 bc1qj3k3mvzl0xt
     13 bc1qfng24nqthrc
     13 bc1qed498rk2e9n
     13 bc1qdztlktdghjm
     13 bc1qd8uxf384kyn

I think many of them are burn addresses, but that can be done to any other "firstbit" address too.

Update: I checked the same for all addresses ever used (including empty ones), and only 1h8BNZkhsPiu6EK has an empty address: 1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw3jHf9aT
If that was your "firstbit" address, there are 16 fakes out there:

Code:

1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19W8qdEN1T3b8Yb
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDraHqMEqK
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDvxP3jxsW
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDvxTBDiyW
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDvxrH3HPD
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDvyCmfBrP
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw2HtdC9Q
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw2U8NNew
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw2YGUPdR
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw3jHf9aT << the real one
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw3v27n8t
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw419xwa7
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw49rz9Lm
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw4D5CR3S
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw4JN9gNK
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw4QuY9PV
1h8BNZkhsPiu6EKazP19WkGxDw4XkVUiv

[DaveF]

.... Yes, it may not be accurate, in some cases the wrong address may be returned/checked, but I don't know of better tools.

Sorry I didn't put it clearly, it's not that there are no better tools, it's the fact that there are no tools or even a way to be sure.

If you can't see the full address and the private key so you can verify that the private key is actually, for that address, while making sure nobody else has seen / still has the private key then you no longer have BTC.

You have a lottery ticket that may or may not have BTC in it when you finally scratch it off.

Look a handy thread that not enough people read: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3315347.0

-Dave

Well this thread is more about classic scams you can get with many other goods you can purchase online unfortunately. But what you said above is interesting, for you the acceptable limit of a shortened address should be 10 characters at least. Address strings shorter than that are such risky? I mean 7+ characters is not enough according to you? Are there some figure (stastistics) about that somewhere?  

Depends on how you look at it.
For the most part not really there is no number. You have to trust whoever is generating the keys that they are not keeping a copy of the private key.
If you trust them, then past that then 10+ should be fairly safe from someone duplicating them.

Some coin makers give a complete address list, those should be safe (eliminating the hologram peel / replace) others do not.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2022902.0

For other things it really becomes a matter of trust vs amount.

I am more likely to trust that someone did not bother to scam me for BTC0.01 then a BTC1.0
But for now I really can't think of a reason to use 1stbits anymore.

-Dave