string value to search for private keys based on WIF

[BlackHatCoiner]

This has so many benefits

I honestly recognize no such things as benefits. "Not reducing the key's security" isn't a benefit. It's the normal state in cryptographic key pairs. Obviously, not reducing the key's security is something good, but it is quite obvious to have that security. I neither understand the rest you said. Why can't you use separate notes to accomplish that?

[1715110461]

1715110461

[GR Sasa]

The thing is, nobody will ever know that this address belongs an vanity-wif, so thats why i consider it "Safe".

I would love to create a WIF that is easy to remember, that has for example my family name on it. How on hell could attacker guess my whole family name? No way in a trillion years. To everyone now that disagree me again, here a kiss 

[ripemdhash]

I'm agree with you.


hmm maybe some people here have WIFs generate in this way?

I will prepare for github soon the code

[o_e_l_e_o]

The thing is, nobody will ever know that this address belongs an vanity-wif, so thats why i consider it "Safe".

"No one will ever know my address comes from a brain wallet, so I consider it safe." - the owner of every brain wallet, minutes before all their coins were stolen.

How on hell could attacker guess my whole family name?

Are you honestly asking how an attacker could possibly guess public information which could probably be gathered by anyone in the world in 60 seconds by looking at your social media profiles? Lol.

[GR Sasa]

Are you honestly asking how an attacker could possibly guess public information which could probably be gathered by anyone in the world in 60 seconds by looking at your social media profiles? Lol.

Well, Chances that the attacker is so smarty ass, as smart as Albert Einstein are currently pretty much ≈1 in 2^33 .

So you're better win 100 times the Lottery to be that smart for performing all those steps. Or you'd better need to know the past and the future. But its impossible

You could have put your crush's name, your grand's grandfather name or you could write memories, or anything or something about WW2 in your WIF. Nobody will ever be able to find out those words, because it will be exactly like seed phrase. Guys if you don't agree that its safe, i will delete my account here. You, just need to randomizes some words, other than that it's completely safe

[BlackHatCoiner]

The thing is, nobody will ever know that this address belongs an vanity-wif, so thats why i consider it "Safe".

Until someone brute forces millions of vanity-wifs and find one with a balance, which as described is trivial to do with modern computers.

You're so arrogant with security. Please avoid using that, you're going to harm yourself.

[GR Sasa]

Until someone brute forces millions of vanity-wifs and find one with a balance, which as described is trivial to do with modern computers.
You're so arrogant with security. Please avoid using that, you're going to harm yourself.

If you randomize some words, it will be perfectly safe. it will be like seed BTCphrase. It is secure.

When @OP reveal his source code, i'm going to make a vanity WIF with my name printed on it "GRSASA".

exactly like this:

Code:

5KGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGNyai9d

but a with a mixed small and big letters.

I gotta post the address then, and put 0.01BTC on it. I'll see then if it gets cracked or not. And if solve any of the 32BTC pzuzle, i gotta also put it in such a private key.

To prove to the community that its safe,

[o_e_l_e_o]

If you randomize some words, it will be perfectly safe. it will be like seed phrase. It is secure.

No, it isn't.

Go ahead and use this. You've been warned multiple times. We can't stop you. But don't expect any sympathy when a bot scanning millions of such addresses each second (as is the case with brain wallets) clears out your funds.

[pooya87]

If you want to add a note about what your private key is for, then just add a note after the private key?

Why can't you use separate notes to accomplish that?

I don't disagree with this question which is why I said the idea itself is weird.
On the other hand, the solution I offered is only aiming to solve the main flaw in OP's idea that was reducing the key's security while making the assumption that there is a reason for having such a scheme. That is from purely a problem solving perspective.

[Synchronice]

This is just what I don't understand, why do people think that randomization lacks security? Something that does not follow a deterministic pattern is more secure because it's less predictable, it's as easy as ABC. When you make something that follows predictable pattern can never be more secure, it breaks the law of randomization.
This really drives me crazy, why do you guys think that randomization is a bad practice?

Go ahead and use this. You've been warned multiple times. We can't stop you. But don't expect any sympathy when a bot scanning millions of such addresses each second (as is the case with brain wallets) clears out your funds.

I second this! My approach is to learn on someone's mistakes, probably OPs approach is to only learn on his own mistakes. Then let it be that way.

[alexeyneu]

exactly like this:

Code:

5KGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGRSasaGNyai9d

but a with a mixed small and big letters.

it will be cracked by me then hehe

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

Red Flags.

1.  No repo for the code so no one can check how these are generated.
2.  Not a wise idea to generate WIF in this format easy to brute force.
3.  Looks like a bunch of "convincer" accounts trying to sucker people to use this.

Poor effort..
Must try harder.

[ripemdhash]

Red Flags.

1.  No repo for the code so no one can check how these are generated.
2.  Not a wise idea to generate WIF in this format easy to brute force.
3.  Looks like a bunch of "convincer" accounts trying to sucker people to use this.

Poor effort..
Must try harder.

Answer for 3: I do not understand , I'm trying to force anyone for use this. It is only showing that we can do a lot with this.
Answer for 2 : No if you do not know what kind "sentences is used" you can't brute force -I can put 0,5 btc on addres and give you a publickey then you can start "bruteforcing", if you will not get the BTC you send me 0,5 btc to my account. can we agree?

Answer 1: It is in pure python. I do not paste it yet to github. No have time.

[DaCryptoRaccoon]

In your software, you're generating WIFs with custom characters at the beginning, like "5HpHahMyFirstBitcoinAddress" or "SatoshiNakamoto." While it may seem convenient to generate personalized WIFs, it actually reduces the overall key strength and poses security risks.

Bitcoin private keys are derived from a secure random number generator, ensuring their unpredictability and resistance to brute force attacks. However, by using custom WIFs with specific strings, you are essentially reducing the randomness and predictability of the keys.  Attackers who are aware of this custom format can optimize their search by focusing on keys that match the pattern you're using. They can generate WIFs with similar custom strings and systematically search for potential matches. This significantly weakens the security of the private keys generated using your software.

t's crucial to prioritize key strength and randomness to protect your assets.

Using standard WIFs generated from a secure random number generator ensures a higher level of security.

Remember, the strength of Bitcoin lies in its cryptographic algorithms and the randomness of private keys.

While it may be tempting to have personalized WIFs, it's essential to consider the potential risks and vulnerabilities associated with such customization.

It's always better to rely on proven methods and established security practices when it comes to handling private keys and protecting your Bitcoin.

All you are doing is introducing weakness to the key by doing this nothing more. It is no more practical to have a custom WIF than a vanity public key.

[Cricktor]

What the OP doesn't want to see or realize is that some language words or combinations of them or even common syllabels already vastly limit the key space. It might be that they can't easily be guessed by an attacker but if you assume such a WIF characters scheme your attack space is already way smaller than a totally random private key. You're just bringing the proven deficiencies of brainwallets to WIF private keys for no reason.

Dear OP, if you think this is a good and safe method, no one here can prevent you from doing so yourself.

But stop telling this is safe. It isn't and multiple users have told you this.