ThePiachu (OP)
|
|
August 25, 2012, 07:28:30 PM |
|
Hmm, if you have an odd case, you can try it against my testing suite: http://gobittest.appspot.com/In order to prevent 0 from being the answer, you have to first subtract 1 from result before modding, then mod, and then add 1. Then your range will be from 1 to N, rather than from 0 to N-1. The multiplication method is quite easy - instead of using the base point G (04 79BE667E F9DCBBAC 55A06295 CE870B07 029BFCDB 2DCE28D9 59F2815B 16F81798 483ADA77 26A3C465 5DA4FBFC 0E1108A8 FD17B448 A6855419 9C47D08F FB10D4B8), you just use the public key provided by the other person. Then you generate the address like normal (without any adding). To obtain the proper private key to be used with Bitcoin, one needs to multiply the two private keys. This method is also available in my testing suite. As for StackExchange, you just need an OpenID and you can log in without any problem.
|
|
|
|
BkkCoins
|
|
August 26, 2012, 02:25:15 AM Last edit: August 26, 2012, 03:15:57 AM by BkkCoins |
|
Thx. I used your test page to verify my method and it works the same. But what I found after plugging results into bitaddress.org and comparing with keyconv is that I do not add a 00h byte after the sum and before converting to WIF. This seems to cause a problem as the base 58 conversion goes awry producing a bad key.
[edit:] Solved! The "getExportedPrivateKey" member of the ECKey class in the BitcoinJS library has a bug. It does not check and pad the byte array to 32 bytes before adding 0x80 and checksum. Incidentally bitaddress.org is using a different version of BitcoinJS that has a "getBitcoinPrivateKeyByteArray" member instead that is fixed. My version of BitcoinJS was pulled from github just a few days ago.
|
|
|
|
runeks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 980
Merit: 1008
|
|
October 07, 2012, 09:31:53 PM |
|
I can't figure out how to build oclvanityminer. Any hints?
|
|
|
|
nokru
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
|
|
November 19, 2012, 03:45:43 AM |
|
is there some way to use fpga to mine for vanity names?
|
|
|
|
ThePiachu (OP)
|
|
November 19, 2012, 06:11:10 AM |
|
is there some way to use fpga to mine for vanity names?
Not yet. We would need some special programming done for them, and I'm guessing that would be a lot more work than creating split-key vanity generator from Vanitygen. You ought to ask the people that created your normal mining software if they could look into creating one for vanity mining.
|
|
|
|
nhminer
|
|
May 15, 2013, 10:48:07 PM |
|
Im trying out the oclvanityminer, but have an odd question: The miner claims to be Searching for pattern: "1krusher", but the site https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork does not list this pattern as needing work. Am I confused, or does getwork pull from another page. Thanks NH
|
BCH - 1EshwUEg9LRbY5WMSw7bkBGQUYQeenkcet
|
|
|
ThePiachu (OP)
|
|
May 15, 2013, 10:50:13 PM |
|
I am not sure, best ask samr7, the author of the miner.
|
|
|
|
nhminer
|
|
May 15, 2013, 10:54:17 PM |
|
doh -- I had it pointed to vanitypooltest.appspot.com instead.
Just curious ... how many new requests do you get for vanity addresses?
|
BCH - 1EshwUEg9LRbY5WMSw7bkBGQUYQeenkcet
|
|
|
ThePiachu (OP)
|
|
May 16, 2013, 03:51:24 AM |
|
doh -- I had it pointed to vanitypooltest.appspot.com instead.
Just curious ... how many new requests do you get for vanity addresses?
Mining requests? My statistics say about 4.5 per minute at the moment. New address requests? Beats me - the solved work page covers all vanity addresses generated by the pool since it got started.
|
|
|
|
ProfMac
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1002
|
|
May 26, 2013, 12:50:51 AM |
|
I was going to try this with a new address that I created on bitcoin-qt. I obtained the address by using validateaddress, which gives a public key. This public key is compressed, and the web page rejects it. I asked in #bitcoin-dev how to get a non-compressed address, and they said: [19:10] <ProfMac> can I get the public key of a new address locally, using bitcoin-qt [19:11] <@gmaxwell> ProfMac: open the console, run validateaddress on it. [19:19] <ProfMac> gmaxwell: thanks, that worked. [19:40] <ProfMac> I submitted the public key to https://vanitypool.appspot.com/newWork and it complains that it is compressed. [19:42] <@gmaxwell> ProfMac: tell the vanitypool people to fix their crap. Generating vanity addresses w/ compressed keys is _faster_ than uncompressed. [19:43] <ProfMac> lol. I will.
The compressed public key in question is: 0208c65179b9375c1cffee6f6c0e865a814ef1cb736dcc464ef3c54e6d9991d92f
|
I try to be respectful and informed.
|
|
|
ThePiachu (OP)
|
|
May 26, 2013, 06:54:48 AM |
|
I was going to try this with a new address that I created on bitcoin-qt. I obtained the address by using validateaddress, which gives a public key. This public key is compressed, and the web page rejects it. I asked in #bitcoin-dev how to get a non-compressed address, and they said: [19:10] <ProfMac> can I get the public key of a new address locally, using bitcoin-qt [19:11] <@gmaxwell> ProfMac: open the console, run validateaddress on it. [19:19] <ProfMac> gmaxwell: thanks, that worked. [19:40] <ProfMac> I submitted the public key to https://vanitypool.appspot.com/newWork and it complains that it is compressed. [19:42] <@gmaxwell> ProfMac: tell the vanitypool people to fix their crap. Generating vanity addresses w/ compressed keys is _faster_ than uncompressed. [19:43] <ProfMac> lol. I will.
The compressed public key in question is: 0208c65179b9375c1cffee6f6c0e865a814ef1cb736dcc464ef3c54e6d9991d92f At the moment almost everyone in the Bitcoin world uses uncompressed keys - they are default for importing into blockchain.info as far as I remember for example. I am not sure whether it is possible to mine for vanity addresses using compressed keys (probably is but I would need to make sure with samr7). Also, I don't know of any vanity address calculator that uses compressed keys. I would advise you to generate a new public-private keypair using www.bitaddress.org or gobittest.appspot.com and use that, as you would probably need to use one of those sites to combine the keys anywhere.
|
|
|
|
refer_2_me
|
|
June 07, 2013, 05:22:35 PM |
|
Hi, so I just started doing the vanity mining. The program started up find and pulled available work and displayed: "Searching for pattern: "1Aurareus" Reward: 0.096000 Value: 0.000002 BTC/Gkey Difficulty: 50656515217834
Total value for current work: 0.000002 BTC/Gkey"
So is it only checking the generated keys against the one pattern "1Aurareus", or is it checking for all available patterns. Assumingily, it would be more profitable to check all the available patterns to see if you randomly get it. Is that possible or is the splitkey thing not allowing it. Or am I way off here?
Thanks!
|
BTC: 1reFerkRnftob5YvbB112bbuwepC9XYLj XPM: APQpPZCfEz3kejrYTfyACY1J9HrjnRf34Y
|
|
|
ThePiachu (OP)
|
|
June 07, 2013, 08:05:05 PM |
|
Hi, so I just started doing the vanity mining. The program started up find and pulled available work and displayed: "Searching for pattern: "1Aurareus" Reward: 0.096000 Value: 0.000002 BTC/Gkey Difficulty: 50656515217834
Total value for current work: 0.000002 BTC/Gkey"
So is it only checking the generated keys against the one pattern "1Aurareus", or is it checking for all available patterns. Assumingily, it would be more profitable to check all the available patterns to see if you randomly get it. Is that possible or is the splitkey thing not allowing it. Or am I way off here?
Thanks!
As far as I know the software checks for a certain amount of keys at a time to optimise performance. You should ask samr7, he is the programmer behind it.
|
|
|
|
jorijnsmit
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 36
Merit: 0
|
|
July 22, 2014, 04:23:44 PM |
|
Hi, so I just started doing the vanity mining. The program started up find and pulled available work and displayed: "Searching for pattern: "1Aurareus" Reward: 0.096000 Value: 0.000002 BTC/Gkey Difficulty: 50656515217834
Total value for current work: 0.000002 BTC/Gkey"
So is it only checking the generated keys against the one pattern "1Aurareus", or is it checking for all available patterns. Assumingily, it would be more profitable to check all the available patterns to see if you randomly get it. Is that possible or is the splitkey thing not allowing it. Or am I way off here?
Thanks!
This is from the script's help page (italics are mine): Contacts the specified bounty pool server, downloads a list of active bounties, and attempts to generate the address with the best difficulty to reward ratio. So unless there are two addresses for which this ratio is exactly the same you might be right; it would be better to check simultaneously then. If not it is better to focus on the most rewarding pattern.
|
|
|
|
TheButterZone
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy
|
|
August 04, 2015, 06:00:21 PM |
|
Was Googling around for a free short string split-key generator (3 letters, case sens, any position) and found this topic. I see there's a fair bit of patterns in the queue at https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork for whatever this necropost is worth.
|
Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
|
|
|
sorryforthat
|
|
October 02, 2015, 11:53:16 PM |
|
Was Googling around for a free short string split-key generator (3 letters, case sens, any position) and found this topic. I see there's a fair bit of patterns in the queue at https://vanitypool.appspot.com/availableWork for whatever this necropost is worth. The remaining in the queue are some of the more difficult addresses to find. I really wish we could get this site some more publicity so we can start to fill up the list with something that is more attainable.
|
|
|
|
|
laineux
|
|
November 16, 2020, 10:50:38 AM |
|
Hello.
Is this project still alive ?
I am generating my own vanity address, but I would participate in this pool.
|
|
|
|
ThePiachu (OP)
|
|
November 16, 2020, 08:36:21 PM |
|
Hello.
Is this project still alive ?
I am generating my own vanity address, but I would participate in this pool.
Yeah, the project is still around - https://vanitypool.appspot.com/ . Haven't heard anyone complain that it's not working, so it should be chugging along just fine.
|
|
|
|
laineux
|
|
November 16, 2020, 08:51:10 PM |
|
Ok @ThePiachu I will probably try one of them next days I don't know if you aware of the error message on your website signature "Go 1.9 is no longer available. Please refer to https://goo.gl/aESk5L for more information."
|
|
|
|
|