FirstBits.com gives wrong result?!

[MaddestScientist]

Hi all,

I just tried FirstBits.com to look for an address "1bbbb", it gets resolved to 1bbbb2oiLBohHtd9uo6o3JeEbMG3ZtFUs, the first use of the address is today (24 May 2012). However, when I use blockchain.info, "1bbbb" becomes 1BBbBqtJcwqSQDTJ2hqVnoMozGxh97vnH3, and the first use of the address is 05 Feb 2011.

Similar issues were observed for "1cccc" and many other addresses.

Does it mean FirstBits.com gives wrong results? Could I be missing something?

Thanks.

[1714183040]

1714183040

[1714183040]

1714183040

[1714183040]

1714183040

[Topazan]

I'm not overly familiar with either service, but it looks like the FirstBits result is case sensitive, the blockchain result is not.  Could that be causing your issue?

[Phinnaeus Gage]

Case sensitive comes to mind, but not sure is that's the cause.

~Bruno~

EDIT: 21 seconds to late.

[MaddestScientist]

At first, I also suspect that case-sensitivity is the cause, but when I check "1abc", both FirstBits.com and blockchain.info return 1AbcTuRqKkr7RsPMKchdSd2kV6dd1THWru, this implies that FirstBits.com is NOT case-sensitive.

Any other ideas?

Case sensitive comes to mind, but not sure is that's the cause.

~Bruno~

EDIT: 21 seconds to late.

[CIYAM]

Any other ideas?

Quite likely this is due to a different character collating method being used by the DBs in question (even if they are using the same RDBMS you can still have different collation methods which determine the ordering).

[MaddestScientist]

This is one of the possibilities.

But I think regardless of the cause behind the differences, this need to be resolved. Otherwise, one could be sending coins to the wrong person if he relies on FirstBits.com

Perhaps the creator of FirstBits.com can give us more information. Anyone know if (s)he is active in this forum?

Any other ideas?

Quite likely this is due to a different character collating method being used by the DBs in question (even if they are using the same RDBMS you can still have different collation methods which determine the ordering).

[CIYAM]

This is one of the possibilities.

But I think regardless of the cause behind the differences, this need to be resolved. Otherwise, one could be sending coins to the wrong person if he relies on FirstBits.com

Certainly this is of concern.

If there aren't already vanity addresses in real use that only differ in case then I would think the result should be a case insensitive match (with the oldest address being retrieved of course), however, if there are such addresses already being used then one would probably require that the matching itself be case sensitive (so 1bbb would never return 1BBB).

[TTBit]

the address "1FuckerynVncy7xviHYGfTQ5tgAJxEM5i8" resolves to "Your firstbits address: 1fucker"

yet...

"1fucker does not match any address in the chain."

and

"1Fucker" resolves to "1FuckerynVncy7xviHYGfTQ5tgAJxEM5i8"

[benjamindees]

It's not case-sensitivity.  It's that Firstbits.com seems to only consider an address after you physically enter it into their website, and not before.

See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82065.0

[ThomasV]

are you relying on the first bits of your vanity address to receive bitcoins?
what could possibly go wrong?

[MaddestScientist]

Thanks for link. 

It's not case-sensitivity.  It's that Firstbits.com seems to only consider an address after you physically enter it into their website, and not before.

See: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=82065.0

[benjamindees]

are you relying on the first bits of your vanity address to receive bitcoins?
what could possibly go wrong?

No.  I considered it before testing it out and finding it to be horribly broken.