Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcoin puzzle transaction ~32 BTC prize to who solves it - page 60. (Read 230409 times)

full member
Activity: 1162
Merit: 237
Shooters Shoot...
Update:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.64379149

I ran another test, and it went through without prompting. Maybe we woke the sleeping giant?

I will show you this one:

https://mempool.space/tx/78f68c0423cd45bc8021eec406d55e4faccaf42ee25fdc0ecc4cb144ad13200f

If you look at the link it shows this:



newbie
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
About the minig class theory you can omit it, it is well documented:

https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/blob/develop/ch12_mining.adoc

Block size is 1MB, Merkle trees, Block header etc... all is there.

Therefore, Alberto, it’s possible that the miner didn’t choose your transaction, even if it had a higher fee.

Yes I know that that depends of how often miners update their mining block template, also depends of miner Node policies to acept or not Full RBF as I said before that is outside of our control.

is it matter for keyhunt that public key is from which type of address ? address start with 1 or 3 or bc
full member
Activity: 1162
Merit: 237
Shooters Shoot...
The death of the monitoring bots for the low bit challenge/puzzles such as the 66, 67, 68 bits.
The sure fire way to get all of your hard earned 6.6 BTC into one of your safe wallets...or is it a sure fire way?
Let me know what you think.

Ok, so here is the current, thoughtout way to beat the bots when dealing with the puzzle/challenge low bit wallets.

I tried this on my first test, but it didn't quire work. I thought it was probably because I fat fingered something, although I knew I didn't.

Turned out to be a lack of monitoring, possibly.

I did run a follow up test (privately) with success, and also had someone else test the process. They encountered what I first encountered and had to send a gentle reminder, lol. More on this below.

So I know of two tests, that have worked, so I am laying this out here so maybe someone can shoot holes in it, and/or whoever solves the 66 bit challenge, can rest a little easy.

What I would do if I found the 66 bit key.

First:
Take the 66 bit found key and import it into whatever wallet. In my tests, I used electrum (older version because I can unselect RBF, just in case). You can use whatever wallet (as long as it allows you to export a signed raw transaction hex.)

Second:
Go to Go to https://slipstream.mara.com/ and see what their current minimum fee rate is.

Third:
Now, create a payment to a safe wallet of yours (From the found, imported, 66 bit wallet.)  
Go through all of the pay options in your particular wallet, pay to, amount, fee, and sign. (Make sure your transaction fee covers the minimum over at slipstream.) BUT DO NOT BROADCAST.

Fourth:
Export the signed transaction, save it somewhere safe and that you will remember. Electrum allows this but I am not sure about every wallet.

Fifth:
Now, open that exported transaction document and you should see something like this (using one that albert0 posted earlier, just as an example:
01000000029e8c8c0f85d43b8d6aa7d41a0d6f45d67c0f003a4285f3046bf8413b14cf557801000 0006a473044022019defb9f5402b1458982ba7e60813ee8824c8882a9551741c20a883895c3f783 02200fcc27f0040c519723edc792bd3a08911618c4e33f1ba06f2edf2362b1f332a80121029a3a2 ae3ad3858cf49421e6ff547598bb8da72c2bce50490067d9ce7b2e2dc90ffffffff

or it could start with a 02
02000000029e8c8c0f85d43b8d6aa7d41a0d6f45d67c0f003a4285f3046bf8413b14cf557801000 0006a473044022019defb9f5402b1458982ba7e60813ee8824c8882a9551741c20a883895c3f783 02200fcc27f0040c519723edc792bd3a08911618c4e33f1ba06f2edf2362b1f332a80121029a3a2 ae3ad3858cf49421e6ff547598bb8da72c2bce50490067d9ce7b2e2dc90ffffffff

Sixth:
Copy that raw transaction.

Seventh:
Head back over to https://slipstream.mara.com/ and paste that raw transaction into the applicable space and select the "Activate Slipstream" button. You should now receive a confirmation message like this:
"In Marathon's mempool, waiting to be mined. You can view the status here."

Eighth:
Select on that view status here button from above. This will open up a new window and will show your tx's status in their mempool and the Transaction ID.

Ninth:
Copy that transaction ID from above and save it somehwhere you will remember.

Ok, now you have successfully bypassed the regular mempool, or have you? Just sit back and wait for the transaction to be mined into Mara's next block, right? It depends...

On my first test, my tx just sat there for days, block after mined block lol. I eventually "cancelled" it.

But I did reach out to slipstream via their email and asked questions, such as, had I done something wrong, not big enough fee, etc. But now since my transaction was gone from their mempool, I didn't get an answer.
So I ran another test, ensuring no fat fingers, and still nothing. So I reached back out to slipsteam again, but this time I had my tx id (from eighth step) and I included that into the email I sent them, and low and behold, the transaction was included in
their next mined block.

The other individual who ran the test (and I did not warn them because I wanted to see if they had the same results as me) had to do the same thing; email slipstream, and then their tx was included into Mara's next mined block.

So I am not sure if they just don't monitor the transactions entered into their site because there aren't many or what. I did reach back out to them via email and waiting for a reply.

Either way, that is two tests completed with the process above with expected results/outcome.

So is this the death of the monitoring bots? You tell me.

The sent from address's tx is never sent to the mempool, exposing its public key. Only after it has been mined into a block, is it exposed.

Thoughts, comments, questions?


full member
Activity: 431
Merit: 105
Ok hi there KtimesG,

could we have your super code for testing, just did not see a code you pasted did all that you said,
just reading a lot around you, would love to find the keys, will share surely, if found any. greets
member
Activity: 165
Merit: 26
65-bit, after 5 minutes I killed it, or else it's just a lost day.

Is this like a biggest dick competition, to randomly put stuff like "Tera" or "Exa" in front of the "keys/s", even though that would only be possible if running on a machine with thousands of TERA-hertz processor?

I will add "QuettaKeys/s" in my code.

Code:
python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b
[+] Starting CPU Kangaroo.... Please Wait     Version [ 15112021 ]
[+] Search Mode: Range search Continuous in the given range
[+] Working on Pubkey: 0430210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1be383c4a8ed4fac77c0d2ad737d8499a362f483f8fe39d1e86aaed578a9455dfc
[+] Using  [Number of CPU Threads: 19] [DP size: 10] [MaxStep: 2]
[+] Scanning Range           0x10000000000000000 : 0x100ffffffffffffff
[+] Scanning Range           0x10100000000000000 : 0x101ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 92.8MB/45.5MB]   
[+] Scanning Range           0x10200000000000000 : 0x102ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 94.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10300000000000000 : 0x103ffffffffffffffs][Dead 2][RAM 98.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10400000000000000 : 0x104ffffffffffffffs][Dead 6][RAM 91.7MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10500000000000000 : 0x105ffffffffffffffs][Dead 1][RAM 91.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10600000000000000 : 0x106ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10700000000000000 : 0x107ffffffffffffffs][Dead 5][RAM 91.1MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10800000000000000 : 0x108ffffffffffffffs][Dead 4][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] [10981.32 TeraKeys/s][Kang 19456][Count 2^29.53/2^29.09][Elapsed 16s][Dead 1][RAM 62.1MB/45.5MB]  ^C


Perhaps my mistake is, that I set to use the parameter -n as default 2**56.

In fact it was designed in this way for those who are not considering to scan the whole range. Let's say searching from A to B you could search smaller chunks of each 56bit range with moving randomly/sequentially overall. Otherwise even if a Key is in the beginning of the range but the collision will not happen untill we have sufficient numbers of Tame and Wild kangaroos. With chunks range searching if the Key happens to be within that smaller chunk, you will find it.

Anyway for any Key searching in the range of 1 to 66 bit Key we could use -n = 18446744073709551615 to bypass this approach.
Also specifically for smaller Keys between 1 to 66 lets say -ntu option could be usefull. We can perhaps set the dp = 16. Then we could first run the Kangaroo using 66puzzle and option -ntu removed and this will run and save the Tame kangaroos into a file HashTable.ice. This can be run several times and when you have couple of GB file then.
Next time while you are actually searching for Any Puzzle in similar range then you will have more numbers of Tame Kangaroos precomputed which will help in the collision faster.

Another allegation about the Display Keys/s is again not the operations/s but roughly the range coverage speed based on the probability of success using 2.08*sqrt(range) operations. There is already Count and Elapsed.

Nothing new about pre-computing Tame DPs. I said this before, Tames can be precomputed in advance, in absence of the Public Key. And Wilds need to come into action after that. Lucky for whoever listened. Maybe now some guys understand why I can crack any 66-bit key in a couple of seconds instead of half a minute.

https://cr.yp.to/dlog/cuberoot-20120919.pdf

jr. member
Activity: 36
Merit: 68
65-bit, after 5 minutes I killed it, or else it's just a lost day.

Is this like a biggest dick competition, to randomly put stuff like "Tera" or "Exa" in front of the "keys/s", even though that would only be possible if running on a machine with thousands of TERA-hertz processor?

I will add "QuettaKeys/s" in my code.

Code:
python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b
[+] Starting CPU Kangaroo.... Please Wait     Version [ 15112021 ]
[+] Search Mode: Range search Continuous in the given range
[+] Working on Pubkey: 0430210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1be383c4a8ed4fac77c0d2ad737d8499a362f483f8fe39d1e86aaed578a9455dfc
[+] Using  [Number of CPU Threads: 19] [DP size: 10] [MaxStep: 2]
[+] Scanning Range           0x10000000000000000 : 0x100ffffffffffffff
[+] Scanning Range           0x10100000000000000 : 0x101ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 92.8MB/45.5MB]   
[+] Scanning Range           0x10200000000000000 : 0x102ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 94.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10300000000000000 : 0x103ffffffffffffffs][Dead 2][RAM 98.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10400000000000000 : 0x104ffffffffffffffs][Dead 6][RAM 91.7MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10500000000000000 : 0x105ffffffffffffffs][Dead 1][RAM 91.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10600000000000000 : 0x106ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10700000000000000 : 0x107ffffffffffffffs][Dead 5][RAM 91.1MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10800000000000000 : 0x108ffffffffffffffs][Dead 4][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] [10981.32 TeraKeys/s][Kang 19456][Count 2^29.53/2^29.09][Elapsed 16s][Dead 1][RAM 62.1MB/45.5MB]  ^C


Perhaps my mistake is, that I set to use the parameter -n as default 2**56.

In fact it was designed in this way for those who are not considering to scan the whole range. Let's say searching from A to B you could search smaller chunks of each 56bit range with moving randomly/sequentially overall. Otherwise even if a Key is in the beginning of the range but the collision will not happen untill we have sufficient numbers of Tame and Wild kangaroos. With chunks range searching if the Key happens to be within that smaller chunk, you will find it.

Anyway for any Key searching in the range of 1 to 66 bit Key we could use -n = 18446744073709551615 to bypass this approach.
Also specifically for smaller Keys between 1 to 66 lets say -ntu option could be usefull. We can perhaps set the dp = 16. Then we could first run the Kangaroo using 66puzzle and option -ntu removed and this will run and save the Tame kangaroos into a file HashTable.ice. This can be run several times and when you have couple of GB file then.
Next time while you are actually searching for Any Puzzle in similar range then you will have more numbers of Tame Kangaroos precomputed which will help in the collision faster.

Another allegation about the Display Keys/s is again not the operations/s but roughly the range coverage speed based on the probability of success using 2.08*sqrt(range) operations. There is already Count and Elapsed.
newbie
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
For those that "might" find this of use, I have plotted the solved puzzles, separated them by groups and combined them all together.

https://imgur.com/a/zvxIrIc

The only information missing is the found location for #120 and #125

Hope they will help someone, I found them very informative and a great guide.




Donations welcome: BTC 1jLU36XEv1YVqWbYL9WoRL3kJZFDvJGFT
newbie
Activity: 10
Merit: 3
Not a wrapper script linking to natively compiled black-box libraries, which should run somewhere around 50 times faster on a CPU. If iceland's kangaroo native lib really does just 200k ops/s than it is funny that a pure Python example runs faster than his black-box lib, right? A native lib should dance with flying bells and whistles well above a few good million ops/s, even when instrumented from a Python wrapper. And when I see stuff like "10.000 TeraKeys/s" it just adds a serious question mark about what is going on. You can never trust something that shows a speed millions of times higher than your CPU's core running frequency.

I also have my scripts completely done by me.
I agree with you, not using natively compiled libraries.
I’ll even give you an example: regarding sha256, I didn’t use any libraries, unlike the scripts I found so far.
I can say that the implementation of sha256d in C+CUDA C made my miner much faster.
member
Activity: 499
Merit: 38
Is this like a biggest dick competition, to randomly put stuff like "Tera" or "Exa" in front of the "keys/s", even though that would only be possible if running on a machine with thousands of TERA-hertz processor?

I will add "QuettaKeys/s" in my code.

Why stop at 'QuettaKeys/s'? Let’s dream even bigger! How about 'UnicornKeys/s' or 'RainbowKeys/s'? With a sprinkle of fairy dust and a dash of imagination, your code will be the talk of the magical kingdom.  Grin
member
Activity: 165
Merit: 26
https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo
Code:
python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b
From Iceland: https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

You haven't "keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff" and you haven't also "-p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b"

In python, main function:
run_puzzle(48, '0291bee5cf4b14c291c650732faa166040e4c18a14731f9a930c1e87d3ec12debb', dp=8, herd_size=1024)

I can uderstand, maybe, you put this on main function
run_puzzle(65, '0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b', dp=8, herd_size=1024)
result:
...
Ops: 131672064 Table size: 514265 Speed: 167818 ops/s
...
not Scanning Range like you write

Maybe I don't have your version or maybe you use bsgs from iceland
if you use that bsgs version:
python bsgs_dll_search.py -b bpfile.bin -bl bloomfile.bin -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff
If you do that, than you got:
============== KEYFOUND ==============
BSGS FOUND PrivateKey  0x1a838b13505b26867
======================================
Search Finished. All pubkeys Found !

You are comparing apples with oranges. My script is a pure-Python, zero libraries, self-contained Kangaroo. Which means it trades performance with simplicity.

Not a wrapper script linking to natively compiled black-box libraries, which should run somewhere around 50 times faster on a CPU. If iceland's kangaroo native lib really does just 200k ops/s than it is funny that a pure Python example runs faster than his black-box lib, right? A native lib should dance with flying bells and whistles well above a few good million ops/s, even when instrumented from a Python wrapper. And when I see stuff like "10.000 TeraKeys/s" it just adds a serious question mark about what is going on. You can never trust something that shows a speed millions of times higher than your CPU's core running frequency.

DO NOT USE MY SCRIPT TO SEARCH FOR PUZZLES, you are wasting your time. It is just a reference implementation, not a fast implementation
newbie
Activity: 10
Merit: 3
https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo
Code:
python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b
From Iceland: https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

You haven't "keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff" and you haven't also "-p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b"

In python, main function:
run_puzzle(48, '0291bee5cf4b14c291c650732faa166040e4c18a14731f9a930c1e87d3ec12debb', dp=8, herd_size=1024)

I can uderstand, maybe, you put this on main function
run_puzzle(65, '0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b', dp=8, herd_size=1024)
result:
...
Ops: 131672064 Table size: 514265 Speed: 167818 ops/s
...
not Scanning Range like you write

Maybe I don't have your version or maybe you use bsgs from iceland
if you use that bsgs version:
python bsgs_dll_search.py -b bpfile.bin -bl bloomfile.bin -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff
If you do that, than you got:
============== KEYFOUND ==============
BSGS FOUND PrivateKey  0x1a838b13505b26867
======================================
Search Finished. All pubkeys Found !
jr. member
Activity: 67
Merit: 1
this speed is fake real speed for Iceland library public key is 200k keys/second sequentially depends on processor
You can write whatever speed you want there xd
member
Activity: 165
Merit: 26
Hi guyz, I am wondering if there is any python version of BSGS or Kangaroo algorithm. If someone knows it please suggest a link to it. Thanks.

https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo

65-bit, after 5 minutes I killed it, or else it's just a lost day.

Is this like a biggest dick competition, to randomly put stuff like "Tera" or "Exa" in front of the "keys/s", even though that would only be possible if running on a machine with thousands of TERA-hertz processor?

I will add "QuettaKeys/s" in my code.

Code:
python kangaroo.py -keyspace 10000000000000000:1ffffffffffffffff -p 0230210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1b
[+] Starting CPU Kangaroo.... Please Wait     Version [ 15112021 ]
[+] Search Mode: Range search Continuous in the given range
[+] Working on Pubkey: 0430210c23b1a047bc9bdbb13448e67deddc108946de6de639bcc75d47c0216b1be383c4a8ed4fac77c0d2ad737d8499a362f483f8fe39d1e86aaed578a9455dfc
[+] Using  [Number of CPU Threads: 19] [DP size: 10] [MaxStep: 2]
[+] Scanning Range           0x10000000000000000 : 0x100ffffffffffffff
[+] Scanning Range           0x10100000000000000 : 0x101ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 92.8MB/45.5MB]   
[+] Scanning Range           0x10200000000000000 : 0x102ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 94.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10300000000000000 : 0x103ffffffffffffffs][Dead 2][RAM 98.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10400000000000000 : 0x104ffffffffffffffs][Dead 6][RAM 91.7MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10500000000000000 : 0x105ffffffffffffffs][Dead 1][RAM 91.4MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10600000000000000 : 0x106ffffffffffffffs][Dead 3][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10700000000000000 : 0x107ffffffffffffffs][Dead 5][RAM 91.1MB/45.5MB] 
[+] Scanning Range           0x10800000000000000 : 0x108ffffffffffffffs][Dead 4][RAM 91.3MB/45.5MB] 
[+] [10981.32 TeraKeys/s][Kang 19456][Count 2^29.53/2^29.09][Elapsed 16s][Dead 1][RAM 62.1MB/45.5MB]  ^C
newbie
Activity: 10
Merit: 3
...
Did you or did Alberto make the btc_miner?


it's mine, my personal project not Alberto
https://i.postimg.cc/Czj6y4gQ/rukka.png
jr. member
Activity: 56
Merit: 1
Hi guyz, I am wondering if there is any python version of BSGS or Kangaroo algorithm. If someone knows it please suggest a link to it. Thanks.

https://github.com/iceland2k14/kangaroo


newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
Hi guyz, I am wondering if there is any python version of BSGS or Kangaroo algorithm. If someone knows it please suggest a link to it. Thanks.
newbie
Activity: 6
Merit: 0
I remember reading some pages back someone suggesting that anything above 90 is safe from bots instantly stealing your private key.
You can experiment yourself with #70, #75, etc and see how long it takes on your hardware, and based on how good it is, account for people who have a lot of hardware more powerful than yours.
newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 0
Hey everyone - is there a general idea of what puzzles are not susceptible to the RBF bot stealers? I suppose the limiting factor would be how fast someone can get the private key with Kangaroo. What puzzles would reasonably be considered "safe" - 101? 131? Is it even worth pursuing any puzzle under 100 at this point?
hero member
Activity: 862
Merit: 662
About the minig class theory you can omit it, it is well documented:

https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook/blob/develop/ch12_mining.adoc

Block size is 1MB, Merkle trees, Block header etc... all is there.

Therefore, Alberto, it’s possible that the miner didn’t choose your transaction, even if it had a higher fee.

Yes I know that that depends of how often miners update their mining block template, also depends of miner Node policies to acept or not Full RBF as I said before that is outside of our control.
hero member
Activity: 630
Merit: 731
Bitcoin g33k
The goal is to find a SHA-256 double hash with 19 leading zeros within the 2^32 possible nonce values.
...
Unfortunately, after 5 months, I haven’t been able to mine any block. I only have 3 RTX 3080 GPUs; I don’t have an ASIC machine.

Wow, with 19 leading zeros, you're practically searching for a needle in a haystack while blindfolded, and the haystack is on another planet! You might have better luck finding a unicorn riding a rainbow. But hey, at least your RTX 3080s are getting a great workout—they’re practically bodybuilders in the world of GPUs now  Grin
Pages:
Jump to: