Vanity Pool - vanity address generator pool

[fizzisist]

VanityPool still lists 1Private but refuses to accept solutions (one of my rig found the solution and all of the ones I pointed at VanityPool tried to submit new ones several times).

I am sorry to hear that. Did you double check that the solution is correct? There have been cases of the miner coming up with incorrect answers. You can check your answer here: gobittest.appspot.com .

I will look into the issue.

That's one of my bounties & hasn't been sent to me as solved as yet.

The solution is waiting for you here then:
https://vanitypool.appspot.com/checkSolved?key=1Private:04C13D9CF2B0E382A4AF29C5E2B97F85C6DD9445F7DCE82CD7207E6FC4716511981B0012C10B39E F152257A8407A2965F92F075379D311D5786D9421795B82D01C

[1714626761]

1714626761

[1714626761]

1714626761

[1714626761]

1714626761

[1714626761]

1714626761

[samr7]

I'm 100% sure oclvanityminer is searching for patterns belonging to only a single public key at once, and this implies the multiplicative method (if I understand correctly). Still, I don't know if it is actually using that method.

There have been a lot of questions lately about additive vs. multiplicative, and how they work in oclvanitygen/oclvanityminer.  I'll try to answer them.

Oclvanityminer uses the additive method:

• Generate a random partial private key
• Calculate the associated partial public key
• Add the base public key to the partial public key to get the test public key
• Generate a large batch (~1M) of sequential addresses by successively adding the generator point to the test public key, and converting the points to addresses
• If a match is found, report the partial private key plus the number of times the test public key was incremented.  Otherwise, repeat the previous step

Sequential public keys in this scheme are generated by successively adding the generator point to the test public key.  In the multiplicative method, we would skip adding the base public key to the test key at the start, and use the base public key as the increment instead of the generator point.

If anyone really wants to use the multiplicative method instead, it's possible to modify oclvanityminer to do this by changing maybe 5-10 lines of code.  The performance difference would be negligible.

You are correct that oclvanityminer will search for addresses belonging to a single public key at a time.  I'm not sure how additive vs. multiplicative makes a difference in the ability to concurrently search for patterns using different base public keys.  For that matter, I'm not quite sure how to efficiently search for multiple patterns with different base public keys in the first place.

[ThePiachu]

Thanks for the clarification samr7.

I edited the wiki accordingly.

[Otoh]

@fizzisist many thanks for the 1Private solution link

[gyverlb]

VanityPool still lists 1Private but refuses to accept solutions (one of my rig found the solution and all of the ones I pointed at VanityPool tried to submit new ones several times).

I am sorry to hear that. Did you double check that the solution is correct? There have been cases of the miner coming up with incorrect answers. You can check your answer here: gobittest.appspot.com .

I will look into the issue.

I don't have traces left, but I got paid for 3 solutions yesterday and I think one of them was 1Private (at least it was shown accepted in the miner's output).

Transaction 9ac1cabecb652a8d74569a8ba2413e7b75b3083a1c9ac90c39dc6d83eb57cd45 just paid for the 1vanity bounty (seeing it accepted in the HTML on the miner's output right now). But 1vanity from 1CXUwsY6pcMAV3iqwovq4Vesh24bBeecTp is still listed as available for 0.0796 BTC on vanitypool and http://fizzisist.com/mining-value/api/vanitypool-value-mult seems to see it too as the expected value matches what my miners are reporting.

Yep, that work has been solved, but it is still listed (I submitted this pattern, in fact). Something is definitely wrong.

An interesting clue in the add/mult question: that page lists it as an additive solution. Was that solved with oclvanityminer?
[...]

Yes it was.

[molecular]

heyja, cool pool!

I'm mining and I also inserted a job (for '1MoLeCuLaR'). I payed BTC 0.15 to address 193qKiLHKQK3LADCzNea9z26DZnd22rPRC as instructed, tx_id: 71c2b2da04087b03813b79e41f663c9a44f999d04b533aa9f98c0f34add7a2bf

page still says "Status: Work is awaiting payment" (19 confirmations).

what up?

[ThePiachu]

heyja, cool pool!

I'm mining and I also inserted a job (for '1MoLeCuLaR'). I payed BTC 0.15 to address 193qKiLHKQK3LADCzNea9z26DZnd22rPRC as instructed, tx_id: 71c2b2da04087b03813b79e41f663c9a44f999d04b533aa9f98c0f34add7a2bf

page still says "Status: Work is awaiting payment" (19 confirmations).

what up?

Hmm, that's odd. I think I'll have to fix that after work. Sorry about the inconvenience.

[molecular]

heyja, cool pool!

I'm mining and I also inserted a job (for '1MoLeCuLaR'). I payed BTC 0.15 to address 193qKiLHKQK3LADCzNea9z26DZnd22rPRC as instructed, tx_id: 71c2b2da04087b03813b79e41f663c9a44f999d04b533aa9f98c0f34add7a2bf

page still says "Status: Work is awaiting payment" (19 confirmations).

what up?

Hmm, that's odd. I think I'll have to fix that after work. Sorry about the inconvenience.

don't worry, thanks for great service

[molecular]

In order to generate a keypair to be used for vanity address, you can use those websites:

https://gobittest.appspot.com/VanityMult
http://bitcoinstatus.rowit.co.uk/other/address.html

The first one is owned by me and works only online, while the second one was created by nibor by modifying the code from https://www.bitaddress.org . It is supposed to work offline after you load the page.

Just saving https://www.bitaddress.org ("save page as") and opening that local file in browser seems to work fine for me.

[fizzisist]

I'm 100% sure oclvanityminer is searching for patterns belonging to only a single public key at once, and this implies the multiplicative method (if I understand correctly). Still, I don't know if it is actually using that method.

There have been a lot of questions lately about additive vs. multiplicative, and how they work in oclvanitygen/oclvanityminer.  I'll try to answer them.

Oclvanityminer uses the additive method:

• Generate a random partial private key
• Calculate the associated partial public key
• Add the base public key to the partial public key to get the test public key
• Generate a large batch (~1M) of sequential addresses by successively adding the generator point to the test public key, and converting the points to addresses
• If a match is found, report the partial private key plus the number of times the test public key was incremented.  Otherwise, repeat the previous step

Sequential public keys in this scheme are generated by successively adding the generator point to the test public key.  In the multiplicative method, we would skip adding the base public key to the test key at the start, and use the base public key as the increment instead of the generator point.

If anyone really wants to use the multiplicative method instead, it's possible to modify oclvanityminer to do this by changing maybe 5-10 lines of code.  The performance difference would be negligible.

You are correct that oclvanityminer will search for addresses belonging to a single public key at a time.  I'm not sure how additive vs. multiplicative makes a difference in the ability to concurrently search for patterns using different base public keys.  For that matter, I'm not quite sure how to efficiently search for multiple patterns with different base public keys in the first place.

Thank you for the explanation! I updated the wording on my site so hopefully it is all correct now.

[ThePiachu]

don't worry, thanks for great service

Okay, I applied some new patches to the system and your bounty has gone through:
51C3B17E8371630BF8535362F2B6DA63631E36022D3C664ABC4">https://vanitypool.appspot.com/check?key=1MoLeCuLaR:041ABE5696BEB61F54922E8818F788F40588E83C71E6A52370CA3D89977D46899FEDC1146CB6FCC 51C3B17E8371630BF8535362F2B6DA63631E36022D3C664ABC4

[runeks]

I'm 100% sure oclvanityminer is searching for patterns belonging to only a single public key at once, and this implies the multiplicative method (if I understand correctly). Still, I don't know if it is actually using that method.

There have been a lot of questions lately about additive vs. multiplicative, and how they work in oclvanitygen/oclvanityminer.  I'll try to answer them.

Oclvanityminer uses the additive method:

• Generate a random partial private key
• Calculate the associated partial public key
• Add the base public key to the partial public key to get the test public key
• Generate a large batch (~1M) of sequential addresses by successively adding the generator point to the test public key, and converting the points to addresses
• If a match is found, report the partial private key plus the number of times the test public key was incremented.  Otherwise, repeat the previous step

Sequential public keys in this scheme are generated by successively adding the generator point to the test public key.  In the multiplicative method, we would skip adding the base public key to the test key at the start, and use the base public key as the increment instead of the generator point.

If anyone really wants to use the multiplicative method instead, it's possible to modify oclvanityminer to do this by changing maybe 5-10 lines of code.  The performance difference would be negligible.

As far as I can gather, your method is much faster than the method proposed by BurtW. You only do EC point addition (and hashing) in the CL kernel, right? BurtW's proposal looks like it includes public key generation in the kernel/loop, which would involve point multiplication (this is slow).

Could you elaborate on what you mean by "successively adding the generator point to the test public key" (step 4)? If "test public key" refers to the key generated in step 3, then repeatedly adding this key to the generator point of the curve would just yield the same point (and address). I assume "test public key" refers to one of the keys in the large batch of sequential public addresses (points)?

How do you create the sequential addresses? So you just use the secp256k1 curve equation to isolate y, and then add 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. to the "test public key"'s x coordinate, and calculate y from this equation (using the secp256k1 parameters)?



And increment x once for each time you want a new sequential point?

You are correct that oclvanityminer will search for addresses belonging to a single public key at a time.  I'm not sure how additive vs. multiplicative makes a difference in the ability to concurrently search for patterns using different base public keys.  For that matter, I'm not quite sure how to efficiently search for multiple patterns with different base public keys in the first place.

It doesn't make a difference. To the best of this forums knowledge - as far as I can see - this requires non-trivial changes to the protocol, one being that the clients who want a vanity address calculated in the same batch as other client's addresses would need to submit their private key to the vanity miner upon request.

[bitcoinhu]

The searched pattern "1Rotsor" already solved (https://vanitypool.appspot.com/check?key=1Rotsor:049d749ebb0fb11d2adc00508708ab514c5070185ae374cb1aacc6b420e05974a93d05acc27c195 d6b28a191fa8e05a00bb2d45ce454666bef1a4721fc5c9ca5ad), but remains in the available works list with the highest lavishness, and oclvanityminer's always get this work from pool 

[ThePiachu]

The searched pattern "1Rotsor" already solved (https://vanitypool.appspot.com/check?key=1Rotsor:049d749ebb0fb11d2adc00508708ab514c5070185ae374cb1aacc6b420e05974a93d05acc27c195 d6b28a191fa8e05a00bb2d45ce454666bef1a4721fc5c9ca5ad), but remains in the available works list with the highest lavishness, and oclvanityminer's always get this work from pool 

Sorry about that. The system is running on the cloud, meaning that sometimes data synchronisation can be a bother. At the moment there were two instances running, one was displaying correctly, the second one didn't notice the update. I'm already testing a fix for that issue, it should be up on the main version of the Pool in a couple hours. For now, I just had to resort to kicking the system manually so it would behave .

[gyverlb]

The searched pattern "1Rotsor" already solved (https://vanitypool.appspot.com/check?key=1Rotsor:049d749ebb0fb11d2adc00508708ab514c5070185ae374cb1aacc6b420e05974a93d05acc27c195 d6b28a191fa8e05a00bb2d45ce454666bef1a4721fc5c9ca5ad), but remains in the available works list with the highest lavishness, and oclvanityminer's always get this work from pool 

Sorry about that. The system is running on the cloud, meaning that sometimes data synchronisation can be a bother. At the moment there were two instances running, one was displaying correctly, the second one didn't notice the update. I'm already testing a fix for that issue, it should be up on the main version of the Pool in a couple hours. For now, I just had to resort to kicking the system manually so it would behave .

Please tell us when it's fixed. I've disabled vanitypool in my configurations: in the current state I lose money on it (0.16BTC for ~6GH/s worth of rigs in 24h...).

[ThePiachu]

Please tell us when it's fixed. I've disabled vanitypool in my configurations: in the current state I lose money on it (0.16BTC for ~6GH/s worth of rigs in 24h...).

The fix is live. I hope it will work as intended.

[fizzisist]

Please tell us when it's fixed. I've disabled vanitypool in my configurations: in the current state I lose money on it (0.16BTC for ~6GH/s worth of rigs in 24h...).

The fix is live. I hope it will work as intended.

How many confirmations do you require before a new pattern is available? I submitted this one and the bounty payment has 8 confirmations, but the work is still "awaiting payment."

I'm hoping to be watching near the moment the work switches over to "available" because I'm testing out a new feature for oclvanityminer that allows you to set a minimum value to mine for, otherwise put oclvanityminer in a sleeping state. This could make it possible to automatically switch to mining vanity addresses whenever it is more valuable than bitcoin mining (right now it isn't)...

If anyone wants to try it out, feel free to try my fork: https://github.com/fizzisist/vanitygen

[fizzisist]

Please tell us when it's fixed. I've disabled vanitypool in my configurations: in the current state I lose money on it (0.16BTC for ~6GH/s worth of rigs in 24h...).

The fix is live. I hope it will work as intended.

How many confirmations do you require before a new pattern is available? I submitted this one and the bounty payment has 8 confirmations, but the work is still "awaiting payment."

I'm hoping to be watching near the moment the work switches over to "available" because I'm testing out a new feature for oclvanityminer that allows you to set a minimum value to mine for, otherwise put oclvanityminer in a sleeping state. This could make it possible to automatically switch to mining vanity addresses whenever it is more valuable than bitcoin mining (right now it isn't)...

If anyone wants to try it out, feel free to try my fork: https://github.com/fizzisist/vanitygen

13 confirmations now... Looks like something went wrong with that fix.

[gyverlb]

fizzizsst: I use your API (http://fizzisist.com/mining-value/api/vanitypool-value-mult) to trigger vanity mining but it seems it doesn't work anymore (returns the same value oclvanityminer used to give me yesterday).

[fizzisist]

fizzizsst: I use your API (http://fizzisist.com/mining-value/api/vanitypool-value-mult) to trigger vanity mining but it seems it doesn't work anymore (returns the same value oclvanityminer used to give me yesterday).

Sorry, I updated the url to just api/vanitypool-value after samr7's explanation yesterday. I forgot to set up a redirect for that one, and the old url just points to the old data (which is no longer being updated). Sorry about that!