BitCrack - A tool for brute-forcing private keys - page 48.

fxsniper

member

Activity: 406

Merit: 47

Quote from: NotATether on March 30, 2021, 03:35:56 AM

Quote from: fxsniper on March 30, 2021, 03:24:47 AM

OK,
I would like to search vanity with keyspace.
VanitySearch search to full key 256 bit and VanitySearch can not control keyspace search
bitCrack can search by options keyspace

How can use VanitySearch for search Vanity by limited keyspace search?

Why would you want to do that? By reducing the keyspace, you are making it harder for it to find a vanity address since there are now less possible addresses that are in that keyspace.

No need Vanity bitCrack anymore because bitCrack are scan every key from 1234...99.100
I want to test by random
now I want test VanitySearch that can use option keyspace search
Can seed option on VanitySearch use custom keyspace?
anybody know please advice

fxsniper

member

Activity: 406

Merit: 47

Quote from: NotATether on March 30, 2021, 03:35:56 AM

Quote from: fxsniper on March 30, 2021, 03:24:47 AM

OK,
I would like to search vanity with keyspace.
VanitySearch search to full key 256 bit and VanitySearch can not control keyspace search
bitCrack can search by options keyspace

How can use VanitySearch for search Vanity by limited keyspace search?

Why would you want to do that? By reducing the keyspace, you are making it harder for it to find a vanity address since there are now less possible addresses that are in that keyspace.

Just do some experiment
for search puzzle #64

zahid888

member

Activity: 282

Merit: 20

the right steps towerds the goal

Quote from: sp_ on March 26, 2021, 08:28:19 AM

Quote from: renedx on March 26, 2021, 07:42:59 AM

Doesn't work. The 30 series problem is code related, not a PTX compile issue.

I will receive my first 30 series card in a week or so. Will fix then.

Bitcrack sp-mod #5 (https://github.com/sp-hash)

[2021-03-30.14:27:51] [Info] Compression: compressed
[2021-03-30.14:27:51] [Info] Starting at: 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000800000000AE55034
[2021-03-30.14:27:51] [Info] Ending at: 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
[2021-03-30.14:27:51] [Info] Counting by: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010000000
[2021-03-30.14:27:51] [Info] Initializing GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
[2021-03-30.14:27:54] [Info] Generating 33,554,432 starting points (1280.0MB)
[2021-03-30.14:27:58] [Info] 10.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:58] [Info] 20.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:58] [Info] 30.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:58] [Info] 40.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] 50.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] 60.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] 70.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] 80.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] 90.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] 100.0%
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] Done
[2021-03-30.14:27:59] [Info] Error: misaligned address
Execution time = 8 seconds

Same Problem

Can you make these improvements for ClBitcrack including --random ?

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: fxsniper on March 30, 2021, 03:24:47 AM

OK,
I would like to search vanity with keyspace.
VanitySearch search to full key 256 bit and VanitySearch can not control keyspace search
bitCrack can search by options keyspace

How can use VanitySearch for search Vanity by limited keyspace search?

Why would you want to do that? By reducing the keyspace, you are making it harder for it to find a vanity address since there are now less possible addresses that are in that keyspace.

fxsniper

member

Activity: 406

Merit: 47

Quote from: WanderingPhilospher on March 30, 2021, 01:47:51 AM

Quote from: fxsniper on March 30, 2021, 01:16:33 AM

Hi,

How can I modify bitcrack (CLbitCrack.exe) to search vanity?

https://github.com/Telariust/VanitySearch-bitcrack/releases/tag/1.15.4

You DON'T.

You use this program if you want to search for vanity:

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/VanitySearch

OK,
I would like to search vanity with keyspace.
VanitySearch search to full key 256 bit and VanitySearch can not control keyspace search
bitCrack can search by options keyspace

How can use VanitySearch for search Vanity by limited keyspace search?

WanderingPhilospher

full member

Activity: 1232

Merit: 242

Shooters Shoot...

Quote from: fxsniper on March 30, 2021, 01:16:33 AM

Hi,

How can I modify bitcrack (CLbitCrack.exe) to search vanity?

https://github.com/Telariust/VanitySearch-bitcrack/releases/tag/1.15.4

You DON'T.

You use this program if you want to search for vanity:

https://github.com/JeanLucPons/VanitySearch

fxsniper

member

Activity: 406

Merit: 47

Hi,

How can I modify bitcrack (CLbitCrack.exe) to search vanity?

https://github.com/Telariust/VanitySearch-bitcrack/releases/tag/1.15.4

fxsniper

member

Activity: 406

Merit: 47

my strategy scan is random slot for scan ( split to small keyspace to search)
because I have very small GPU on laptop and I works use for solve puzzle only free time)

First time I use batch file call BitCrack it work fine

and I try to use C# create small utility make bitcrack lurcher
create launcher work better bath file
but I have problem with use variable private key is very long
I am not programmer I don't understand about byte

now I try python call cubitcrack.exe to work , python very easy

try to use subprocess function, it is work on windows 10

subprocess it work on windows 10

Code:

import subprocess
import os

#p=subprocess.Popen("notepad",shell=False)
#p=subprocess.Popen("kangaroo in.txt",shell=False)
p=subprocess.Popen("cubitcrack.exe -i in.txt",shell=False)

Markzuberg64

jr. member

Activity: 35

Merit: 2

Quote from: sp_ on March 25, 2021, 11:40:04 AM

I have a program that find the key in 1ms. It is written in sql. Local database. Here is the sourcecode. It is OpenSource:

select privatekey from compressed_bitcoinadresses where adress="122AJhKLEfkFBaGAd84pLp1kfE7xK3GdT8";

Quote

SP_ LINK IS MISSING to your opensource sql search tool. Cant find in your repositries also.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: sp_ on March 26, 2021, 01:00:43 PM

Quote from: NotATether on March 26, 2021, 11:22:33 AM

The annoying part is that the offending region of memory is 32-bit aligned

Vector instructions need 16byte alignment.
In bitcrack sp-mod #5 ~66% of the time is used to multuply numbers. Pretty stupid algorithm. With tensor cores enabled, might push the hashrate abit.

So dynamically allocating all the blasted local variables should solve it then since those are returned on 256-bit boundaries.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: NotATether on March 26, 2021, 11:22:33 AM

The annoying part is that the offending region of memory is 32-bit aligned

Vector instructions need 16byte alignment.
In bitcrack sp-mod #5 ~66% of the time is used to multuply numbers. Pretty stupid algorithm. With tensor cores enabled, might push the hashrate abit.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: renedx on March 26, 2021, 11:15:42 AM

Quote from: NotATether on March 26, 2021, 10:25:56 AM

I discovered that it's actually the Link Time Optimization (-dlto switch) that nvcc is doing to the object code that's the culprit and messing with CUDA API functions, which is also the reason why linking takes so long, and that this feature is turned off while using the debugging switch -G. Unfortunately there is no switch that turns it off, but it shouldn't be too bad because I can successfully reproduce the bug with -b 1 -t 32 -p 1 (the threads absolutely have to be a multiple of 32 or else the program will complain).

Isn't this the same thing as for Legacy Mode execution? Would at least explain why legacy was running (just horribly slow).

Legacy mode is really just no-frills CUDA compilation without fancy optimizations behind your back.

The optimizations are what's killing the program this is why it can only be reproduced in PTX and not in source code. Think about it, even a T4 running Bitcrack compiled with compute 5.2 is crashing. It means that something has changed in the way newer GPUs get their code compiled that makes bad PTX.

The annoying part is that the offending region of memory is 32-bit aligned (so maybe older cards had no problem with that), and there's unsigned int arrays everywhere. Also today's debugging efforts have come to nothing so I think I'll try arming BSGS/Kangaroo/VanitySearch with Bitcrack-like searches instead.

renedx

jr. member

Activity: 36

Merit: 3

Quote from: NotATether on March 26, 2021, 10:25:56 AM

I discovered that it's actually the Link Time Optimization (-dlto switch) that nvcc is doing to the object code that's the culprit and messing with CUDA API functions, which is also the reason why linking takes so long, and that this feature is turned off while using the debugging switch -G. Unfortunately there is no switch that turns it off, but it shouldn't be too bad because I can successfully reproduce the bug with -b 1 -t 32 -p 1 (the threads absolutely have to be a multiple of 32 or else the program will complain).

Isn't this the same thing as for Legacy Mode execution? Would at least explain why legacy was running (just horribly slow).

Didn't know about this one tho:

Quote

With a new code target, lto_70, you can get fine-grained control to indicate which target architecture should store the LTO intermediary instead of SASS or PTX. For example, to store Volta LTO and Ampere PTX, you would compile with the following code example:

nvcc -gencode arch=compute_70,code=lto_70
-gencode arch=compute_80,code=compute_80

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: renedx on March 26, 2021, 09:32:18 AM

Quote from: NotATether on March 26, 2021, 09:21:33 AM

Hang on, I'm zoning in on the error. It appears to be returned from a CUDA API function so that's some good news

This issue is also reproducible on RTX 20 cards.

I'm currently busy strapping all the API calls with printf's after the error checks are triggered to see which one it is.

Cool! Hopefully your printfs do not slow it down too much causing it to work. That was our biggest pain in the .........
I've been checking our discord, but there is really nothing you didn't already know/ran into it.

I discovered that it's actually the Link Time Optimization (-dlto switch) that nvcc is doing to the object code that's the culprit and messing with CUDA API functions, which is also the reason why linking takes so long, and that this feature is turned off while using the debugging switch -G. Unfortunately there is no switch that turns it off, but it shouldn't be too bad because I can successfully reproduce the bug with -b 1 -t 32 -p 1 (the threads absolutely have to be a multiple of 32 or else the program will complain).

renedx

jr. member

Activity: 36

Merit: 3

Quote from: NotATether on March 26, 2021, 09:21:33 AM

Hang on, I'm zoning in on the error. It appears to be returned from a CUDA API function so that's some good news

This issue is also reproducible on RTX 20 cards.

I'm currently busy strapping all the API calls with printf's after the error checks are triggered to see which one it is.

Cool! Hopefully your printfs do not slow it down too much causing it to work. That was our biggest pain in the .........
I've been checking our discord, but there is really nothing you didn't already know/ran into it.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: renedx on March 26, 2021, 09:15:43 AM

Quote from: sp_ on March 26, 2021, 08:28:19 AM

Quote from: renedx on March 26, 2021, 07:42:59 AM

Doesn't work. The 30 series problem is code related, not a PTX compile issue.

I will receive my first 30 series card in a week or so. Will fix then.

Awesome, would you mind sharing what the fix if you get it fixed? As we noobs been trying for a while Grin

Would love to know what've been overlooking.

Hang on, I'm zoning in on the error. It appears to be returned from a CUDA API function so that's some good news

This issue is also reproducible on RTX 20 cards.

I'm currently busy strapping all the API calls with printf's after the error checks are triggered to see which one it is.

renedx

jr. member

Activity: 36

Merit: 3

Quote from: sp_ on March 26, 2021, 08:28:19 AM

Quote from: renedx on March 26, 2021, 07:42:59 AM

Doesn't work. The 30 series problem is code related, not a PTX compile issue.

I will receive my first 30 series card in a week or so. Will fix then.

Awesome, would you mind sharing what the fix if you get it fixed? As we noobs been trying for a while Grin

Would love to know what've been overlooking.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: renedx on March 26, 2021, 07:42:59 AM

Doesn't work. The 30 series problem is code related, not a PTX compile issue.

I will receive my first 30 series card in a week or so. Will fix then.

renedx

jr. member

Activity: 36

Merit: 3

Quote from: sp_ on March 26, 2021, 06:48:34 AM

Quote from: zahid888 on March 24, 2021, 07:30:52 AM

All four mods are not working in 30 series GPUs Sad

waiting for your 5th mod

Can you try #5? Does it work?

Doesn't work. The 30 series problem is code related, not a PTX compile issue.

_Counselor

member

Activity: 111

Merit: 61

Quote from: sp_ on March 26, 2021, 06:48:34 AM

Quote from: zahid888 on March 24, 2021, 07:30:52 AM

All four mods are not working in 30 series GPUs Sad

waiting for your 5th mod

Can you try #5? Does it work?

Code:

C:\Users\Admin\Desktop\Bitcrack-spmod5>cuBitCrack.exe --keyspace 8000000000000000:ffffffffffffffff 16jY7qLJnxb7CHZyqBP8qca9d51gAjyXQN

Bitcrack sp-mod #5 (https://github.com/sp-hash)

[2021-03-26.15:07:12] [Info] Compression: compressed
[2021-03-26.15:07:12] [Info] Starting at: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000008000000000000000
[2021-03-26.15:07:12] [Info] Ending at: 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
[2021-03-26.15:07:12] [Info] Counting by: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2021-03-26.15:07:12] [Info] Initializing GeForce RTX 3090
[2021-03-26.15:07:12] [Info] Generating 48,617,472 starting points (1854.6MB)
[2021-03-26.15:07:20] [Info] 10.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:20] [Info] 20.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:20] [Info] 30.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:20] [Info] 40.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] 50.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] 60.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] 70.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] 80.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] 90.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] 100.0%
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] Done
[2021-03-26.15:07:21] [Info] Error: misaligned address
Execution time = 9 seconds

Topic: BitCrack - A tool for brute-forcing private keys - page 48. (Read 77647 times)