Vanity Pool - vanity address generator pool

[cogabonito]

winter is six characters, so it's easy even you use your cpu power, you can get it in less than an hour.

[coinnewbit]

winter is six characters, so it's easy even you use your cpu power, you can get it in less than an hour.

Oh, so seven characters would take maybe about a few days with 4 r920s?

[cogabonito]

If it's not case sensitive, it should take less than a day.

[coinnewbit]

If it's not case sensitive, it should take less than a day.

I see. Thanks!

[blackvoice]

Is there any other vanity pools? (I couldn't find any other) Or this is only one? If there are multiple ones, which one would be most profitable? ie. with most rewards and easiest addresses.

------------

I think just one

[TheRealSteve]

Is there any other vanity pools? (I couldn't find any other) Or this is only one? If there are multiple ones, which one would be most profitable? ie. with most rewards and easiest addresses.

There are others, but Vanity Pool is the only particularly active one.
The others:
Vanity Address Market Place (VAMP) - in alpha, may be broken right now.  I contacted the proprietor, but didn't get a response.
Vanity Address Request (VAR) - should work, doesn't see many 'miners' though, and as a result not many requests.

You may want to set up some automated system to check for new work at Vanity Pool and see if it's profitable enough for you to mine, as most of the existing work is much too complex for the given rewards.

[bardi.harborow]

The website has been updated to include a message from the admin:

Important message from the admin:
The Pool now supports compressed key solutions. We will also be phasing out additive solutions soon, so make sure to keep your miners up to date.

Would someone mind explaining what all this business about additive/multiplicative/compressed key solutions is. I also saw this:

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.

Which is confusing me. I thought the system went like this:

• 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 address public key
• Use RipeMD160 and Base58 to check the address. Repeat.

I'm not really on top of ECDSA and this is really confusing. Any help is appreciated.

[TheRealSteve]

Would someone mind explaining what all this business about additive/multiplicative/compressed key solutions is.

It's a bit technical, but let's distill it down to the basics...

ECDSA keys are comprised of X and Y coordinate information.  A compressed key is simply a shorter representation of the public key by discarding the Y coordinate and instead adding a small bit of information about the coordinates that allows a bit of code to work out the Y coordinate based on the X coordinate.
This is desirable because it keeps the size of the blockchain down a fair bit at the expense of a teensy bit more computation for any piece of software that has to actually deal with these calculations.
However, because Bitcoin addresses are based on the public key representation - rather than the public key information - such a compressed key yields a different address than a non-compressed key.
( For those wondering - yes, that means that for every address out there, there's another matching address.  That's why private keys represented in a WIF format will have a bit of information for clients on whether the public key is uncompressed (WIF starts with a '5') or compressed (WIF starts with 'K' or 'L'), while for raw or incorrect imports you'll have to help the client along a bit by specifying it specifically. )

The additive and multiplicative bits are even more technical, you really would have to read up on the finer details, but suffice it to say that both yield the same results due to the way elliptic curve cryptography work with the exception that when using additive you can combine two public keys and get the desired address, while with multiplicative you can't.  This doesn't really affect the end-result other than having to choose which combination to use to actually get the correct address - i.e. if it is multiplicative and you choose additive instead, you still get a valid Bitcoin address.. just not the one with the vanity.

Can't help you with the other one other than that I believe the steps are exactly as you mention with the modification that the base point is added as that still yields valid results and is faster than re-generating a new key for each test.

[micax1]

hi got the solution for

Pattern: 1BitSnitch
Address: 1BiTSniTCH....
Privkey: Kx19...........



when submitting - getting error:
Solution does not match the pattern

using bitcoin address utility by Casascius to convert key to hex.
Please advise.

[ThePiachu]

hi got the solution for

Pattern: 1BitSnitch
Address: 1BiTSniTCH....
Privkey: Kx19...........



when submitting - getting error:
Solution does not match the pattern

using bitcoin address utility by Casascius to convert key to hex.
Please advise.

Addresses are case sensitive. Also keep in mind to use split-key vanity address generators in case you haven't been.

[micax1]

hi got the solution for

Pattern: 1BitSnitch
Address: 1BiTSniTCH....
Privkey: Kx19...........



when submitting - getting error:
Solution does not match the pattern

using bitcoin address utility by Casascius to convert key to hex.
Please advise.

Addresses are case sensitive. Also keep in mind to use split-key vanity address generators in case you haven't been.

oh ok.
missed split-key somehow...
is there opportunity to use list of prefixes with list of Public Keys with oclvanityminer?

also is there opportunity to generate priv key without pubkey and than combine somehow?

Or it is only possible with oclvanitygen to generate 1 address at a time with split-key requirements?

thank you!

[micax1]

Trying vanityminer on pool:
Is it normal to have 1.2y 50% prob on 50mkey/sec?

[TheRealSteve]

Trying vanityminer on pool:
Is it normal to have 1.2y 50% prob on 50mkey/sec?

Given the usual vanities being requested - the current one being selected being 1AntjeDahm - yeah, probably not entirely unexpected.  My test machine would take a decade and then some, on average

[ThePiachu]

oh ok.
missed split-key somehow...
is there opportunity to use list of prefixes with list of Public Keys with oclvanityminer?

also is there opportunity to generate priv key without pubkey and than combine somehow?

Or it is only possible with oclvanitygen to generate 1 address at a time with split-key requirements?

thank you!

If it not possible to generate it without public key being used. Otherwise you are compromising the security of the private key by knowing it. As far as I remember, you can use vanityminer and specify the public key in it even if you are generating offline. Best look at samr7's vanitygen thread for instructions.

Trying vanityminer on pool:
Is it normal to have 1.2y 50% prob on 50mkey/sec?

A lot of the time Vanity Pool doesn't have very profitable work. However, new work comes in a few times a week that has better payout. If you automate your vanity miner to fetch work from the pool automatically you should be on that work quickly.

[micax1]

oh ok.
missed split-key somehow...
is there opportunity to use list of prefixes with list of Public Keys with oclvanityminer?

also is there opportunity to generate priv key without pubkey and than combine somehow?

Or it is only possible with oclvanitygen to generate 1 address at a time with split-key requirements?

thank you!

If it not possible to generate it without public key being used. Otherwise you are compromising the security of the private key by knowing it. As far as I remember, you can use vanityminer and specify the public key in it even if you are generating offline. Best look at samr7's vanitygen thread for instructions.

Trying vanityminer on pool:
Is it normal to have 1.2y 50% prob on 50mkey/sec?

A lot of the time Vanity Pool doesn't have very profitable work. However, new work comes in a few times a week that has better payout. If you automate your vanity miner to fetch work from the pool automatically you should be on that work quickly.

but it still pure luck - as you are not paid by shares or work contributed - first who found takes all prize?

[TheRealSteve]

but it still pure luck - as you are not paid by shares or work contributed - first who found takes all prize?

Correct.  There have been suggestions to make it more pool-like, but really there would first have to be more interest in vanity addresses again to begin with.  They have gone somewhat out of vogue

[langezwieper]

I downloaded the latest version and compiled it for OSX but I can't seem to specify a public address when I use ./oclvanitygen instead of ./vanitygen however the topic start mentions it's both possible. What am I missing? -P doesn't seem to be an option for oclvanitygen.

[ThePiachu]

I downloaded the latest version and compiled it for OSX but I can't seem to specify a public address when I use ./oclvanitygen instead of ./vanitygen however the topic start mentions it's both possible. What am I missing? -P doesn't seem to be an option for oclvanitygen.

Best ask on the vanitygen's topic.

[bitllionaire]

is it profitable to "mine" this?

[TheRealSteve]

is it profitable to "mine" this?

That depends on the available work.  The work currently available (as I'm writing this), is too high in difficulty - meaning you would be better off just mining Bitcoin directly.

If you check this list: https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork
Look for the last column, 'Lavishness'.  If that is above 1.0, it makes sense to try generating that vanity address.

Such work pops up from time to time, but you're basically best off setting up a system that checks for such work and only tries mining it when it pops up, instead of 'wasting' processing time on the hard ones that you could otherwise be using for something else.
( I believe there's a fork that semi-automatically does this, but I can't think of it off the top of my head. )

And therein lies a bit of a rub: the Lavishness is only with respect to mining Bitcoin.  It's entirely possible that you can get better returns by mining an Altcoin, even if a relatively lucrave Bitcoin vanity address pops up.