That solved it!! It was the version, I had a very old version.
I installed this release https://github.com/brichard19/BitCrack/releases/tag/0.21
Thank you for the help!
Topic: BitCrack - A tool for brute-forcing private keys - page 96. (Read 76881 times)
Again, thank you for your help. 
I can do it with 1 address like this:
BitCrack.exe -s 6BBF8CCF80F8E184D1D300EF2CE45F7260E56766519C977831678F0000000000 1FshYsUh3mqgsG29XpZ23eLjWV8Ur3VwH
But I can't make it work with several addresses in the txt file.
When I run the bat file:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
it opens and almost instantly closes. I barely can see what does it say.
But I recorded the screen, and it gives an error: invalid address , because it assumes the target as "-i" and not the address it self on each line.
What do I need to change? Looks like some syntax mistake.
I can do it with 1 address like this:
BitCrack.exe -s 6BBF8CCF80F8E184D1D300EF2CE45F7260E56766519C977831678F0000000000 1FshYsUh3mqgsG29XpZ23eLjWV8Ur3VwH
But I can't make it work with several addresses in the txt file.
When I run the bat file:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
it opens and almost instantly closes. I barely can see what does it say.
But I recorded the screen, and it gives an error: invalid address , because it assumes the target as "-i" and not the address it self on each line.
What do I need to change? Looks like some syntax mistake.
What version of bitcrack do you have?
Try to make a list of addresses in the program 'notepad'. For each line at the address without spaces, periods, commas, etc.
There was also a problem with reading the address list, the re-creation in the 'notepad' helped.
Again, thank you for your help.
I can do it with 1 address like this:
BitCrack.exe -s 6BBF8CCF80F8E184D1D300EF2CE45F7260E56766519C977831678F0000000000 1FshYsUh3mqgsG29XpZ23eLjWV8Ur3VwH
But I can't make it work with several addresses in the txt file.
When I run the bat file:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
it opens and almost instantly closes. I barely can see what does it say.
But I recorded the screen, and it gives an error: invalid address , because it assumes the target as "-i" and not the address it self on each line.
What do I need to change? Looks like some syntax mistake.
I can do it with 1 address like this:
BitCrack.exe -s 6BBF8CCF80F8E184D1D300EF2CE45F7260E56766519C977831678F0000000000 1FshYsUh3mqgsG29XpZ23eLjWV8Ur3VwH
But I can't make it work with several addresses in the txt file.
When I run the bat file:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
it opens and almost instantly closes. I barely can see what does it say.
But I recorded the screen, and it gives an error: invalid address , because it assumes the target as "-i" and not the address it self on each line.
What do I need to change? Looks like some syntax mistake.
Thank you for the answer.
1. I have to run the .bat file with something like this:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
2. But I need 1 file with this name "addr.txt" and another with "out.txt" in the same folder, right?
3. In the file "addr.txt" I need BTC addresses (1 per line), correct?
4. what do I need in the "out.txt" file?
1. I have to run the .bat file with something like this:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
2. But I need 1 file with this name "addr.txt" and another with "out.txt" in the same folder, right?
3. In the file "addr.txt" I need BTC addresses (1 per line), correct?
4. what do I need in the "out.txt" file?
1. Yes, create .bat with this line
1.1. switch -s address from which to start checking;
switch -r is the number of addresses to check starting from the -s parameter.
2. In the addr.txt file you insert the addresses you want to find, and the program will create the out.txt file when it finds a match.
3. Yes.
4. The out.txt file will be created by the program when a match is found.
Thank you for the answer.
1. I have to run the .bat file with something like this:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
2. But I need 1 file with this name "addr.txt" and another with "out.txt" in the same folder, right?
3. In the file "addr.txt" I need BTC addresses (1 per line), correct?
4. what do I need in the "out.txt" file?
1. I have to run the .bat file with something like this:
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
2. But I need 1 file with this name "addr.txt" and another with "out.txt" in the same folder, right?
3. In the file "addr.txt" I need BTC addresses (1 per line), correct?
4. what do I need in the "out.txt" file?
I would like to add more than one BTC address as TARGET.
How do I do that?
I know it's one address per line, but in the same BAT file we use to run BitCrack64.exe -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 ?
Or in another txt file?
Thank you for any help
How do I do that?
I know it's one address per line, but in the same BAT file we use to run BitCrack64.exe -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 ?
Or in another txt file?
Thank you for any help
bitcrack64 -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 -c -i addr.txt -o out.txt -s 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 -r 100000000000
I would like to add more than one BTC address as TARGET.
How do I do that?
I know it's one address per line, but in the same BAT file we use to run BitCrack64.exe -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 ?
Or in another txt file?
Thank you for any help
How do I do that?
I know it's one address per line, but in the same BAT file we use to run BitCrack64.exe -b 32 -t 256 -p 16 ?
Or in another txt file?
Thank you for any help
help me put a command
input address.txt
output result.txt
BitCrack64.exe input address output result.txt
https://image.ibb.co/mbTGye/AAA.pnginput address.txt
output result.txt
BitCrack64.exe input address output result.txt
BitCrack64.exe -i address.txt -o result.txt
help type command here
help me put a command
input address.txt
output result.txt
BitCrack64.exe input address output result.txt
https://github.com/brichard19/BitCrack Look at the bottom of the page.input address.txt
output result.txt
BitCrack64.exe input address output result.txt
help me put a command
input address.txt
output result.txt
BitCrack64.exe input address output result.txt
input address.txt
output result.txt
BitCrack64.exe input address output result.txt
you need to optimize the OpenCL drivers in order to get into that speed.
What do you mean by 'optimize the OpenCL drivers'? What drivers?
(Once upon a time I found the SDK 3.0 is an insane registry eater while previous version, don't remember exactly was it 2.9 or 3.0beta, was faster but buggy.)
waiting version for AMD 
Have a multi GPU version running 170mKeys/s on RX570 or 150mKeys/s on GTX 1060, a rig with 6 runs just above a billion/sec.
Your speed is double compare with mine.1060 3G win 7, 16G ram, core i5 ivy. [/quote]
He's using his own fork/version. Question is: if it is free, open-source or real, he didn't shared the link.
-snip-
Is this the version that keychainX is talking about: Faster and Autonomous Large Bitcoin Collider upgrade?'Coz I'm seeing the same users from that thread.
[/quote]
No, I have a custom made version, you need to optimize the OpenCL drivers in order to get into that speed.
Have a multi GPU version running 170mKeys/s on RX570 or 150mKeys/s on GTX 1060, a rig with 6 runs just above a billion/sec.
Your speed is double compare with mine.1060 3G win 7, 16G ram, core i5 ivy. -snip-
Is this the version that keychainX is talking about: Faster and Autonomous Large Bitcoin Collider upgrade?'Coz I'm seeing the same users from that thread.
I have try with my 1060
This result give the same speed of Vanitigen, but it not support multi GPU at now.
This result give the same speed of Vanitigen, but it not support multi GPU at now.
Default settings are not optimal. Play with -p -b -t settings
And it doesn't check uncompressed until you say so.
For gtx1070 I got 80MK instead of 40MK with vanitygen.
But I dig for collisions also, not only 32BTC bounty.
While searching for 32BTC bounty alone I get about 240MK on gtx1070 and that's impressive!
Have a multi GPU version running 170mKeys/s on RX570 or 150mKeys/s on GTX 1060, a rig with 6 runs just above a billion/sec.
Windows 10
Your speed is double compare with mine.1060 3G win 7, 16G ram, core i5 ivy. Windows 10
Hey! Still no benchmarks on good cards?
I have try with my 1060Code:
D:\C\BitCrack>BitCrack64 1FshYsUh3mqgsG29XpZ23eLjWV8Ur3VwH
[2018-09-14.17:24:58] [Info] Compression: compressed
[2018-09-14.17:24:58] [Info] Starting at: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2018-09-14.17:24:58] [Info] Initializing GeForce GTX 1060 3GB
[2018-09-14.17:25:07] [Info] Generating 1,179,648 starting points (45.0MB)
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 10.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 20.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 30.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 40.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 50.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 60.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 70.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 80.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:10] [Info] 90.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:10] [Info] 100.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:10] [Info] Done
GeForce GTX 1060 381/3072MB | 1 target 60.61 MKey/s (1,875,640,320 total) [00:00:29]^C
D:\C\BitCrack>BitCrack64 -c -u 1FshYsUh3mqgsG29XpZ23eLjWV8Ur3VwH
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Compression: both
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Starting at: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Initializing GeForce GTX 1060 3GB
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Generating 1,179,648 starting points (45.0MB)
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] 10.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] 20.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 30.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 40.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 50.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 60.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 70.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 80.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 90.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 100.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] Done
GeForce GTX 1060 381/3072MB | 1 target 46.93 MKey/s (685,375,488 total) [00:00:12]
[2018-09-14.17:24:58] [Info] Compression: compressed
[2018-09-14.17:24:58] [Info] Starting at: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2018-09-14.17:24:58] [Info] Initializing GeForce GTX 1060 3GB
[2018-09-14.17:25:07] [Info] Generating 1,179,648 starting points (45.0MB)
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 10.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 20.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 30.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:08] [Info] 40.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 50.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 60.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 70.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:09] [Info] 80.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:10] [Info] 90.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:10] [Info] 100.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:10] [Info] Done
GeForce GTX 1060 381/3072MB | 1 target 60.61 MKey/s (1,875,640,320 total) [00:00:29]^C
D:\C\BitCrack>BitCrack64 -c -u 1FshYsUh3mqgsG29XpZ23eLjWV8Ur3VwH
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Compression: both
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Starting at: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Initializing GeForce GTX 1060 3GB
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] Generating 1,179,648 starting points (45.0MB)
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] 10.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:48] [Info] 20.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 30.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 40.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 50.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:49] [Info] 60.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 70.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 80.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 90.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] 100.0%
[2018-09-14.17:25:50] [Info] Done
GeForce GTX 1060 381/3072MB | 1 target 46.93 MKey/s (685,375,488 total) [00:00:12]
This result give the same speed of Vanitigen, but it not support multi GPU at now.
https://prnt.sc/kubfus
Hey! Still no benchmarks on good cards?
Hi all,
I've been working on a tool for brute-forcing Bitcoin private keys. The main purpose of this tool is to contribute to the effort of solving the Bitcoin puzzle transactions: https://blockchain.info/tx/08389f34c98c606322740c0be6a7125d9860bb8d5cb182c02f98461e5fa6cd15
I've been working on a tool for brute-forcing Bitcoin private keys. The main purpose of this tool is to contribute to the effort of solving the Bitcoin puzzle transactions: https://blockchain.info/tx/08389f34c98c606322740c0be6a7125d9860bb8d5cb182c02f98461e5fa6cd15
Does your tool include the increasing bits of entropy with each consecutive address? This pattern was indicated before:
I see a pattern but I do not think it will help much.
My conjecture is that the sequence number (the BTC amount) simply states the number of random bits in the private key.
Check it out:
The 0.001 BTC output used a 1 bit key (already claimed obviously)
The 0.002 BTC output used a 2 bit key
The 0.003 BTC output used a 3 bit key
etc...
The 0.019 BTC output used a 19 bit key
So I would claim the next unclaimed output uses a 51 bit key.
My conjecture is that the sequence number (the BTC amount) simply states the number of random bits in the private key.
Check it out:
The 0.001 BTC output used a 1 bit key (already claimed obviously)
The 0.002 BTC output used a 2 bit key
The 0.003 BTC output used a 3 bit key
etc...
The 0.019 BTC output used a 19 bit key
So I would claim the next unclaimed output uses a 51 bit key.
Interesting.
Here's a thought. What if that is the ONLY pattern.
Consider the possibility that the person that created this "puzzle" has done so as a form of "canary in the coal mine".
The idea would be to generate a bitcoin address completely randomly, but which only uses X bits of entropy. Then progressively store large values of bitcoins for each increase in entropy to provide an incentive for someone to try and access it.
So:
- The only possible address with 1 bit of entropy is the address associated with the private key having binary value 1
- There are 3 possible addresses with 2 bits of entropy. The addresses associated with the private keys having each of the following binary values (01, 10, 11), and one of them was chosen at random (11)
- There are 7 possible addresses with 3 bits of entropy, The addresses associated with the private keys having each of the following values (001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, and 111), and one of them was chosen at random (111)
- There are 15 possible addresses with 4 bits of entropy, and one of them was chosen at random (1000)
- There are 31 possible addresses with 5 bits of entropy, and one of them was chosen at random (10101)
- There are 63 possible addresses with 6 bits of entropy, and one of them was chosen at random (110001)
- There are 127 possible addresses with 7 bits of entropy, and one of them was chosen at random (1001100)
- and so on
By looking at which addresses have been "claimed", the creator of the "puzzle" can get a feel for the current security of version 1 bitcoin addresses.
So, if there are 50 addresses that have been "claimed", perhaps they'll avoid using any bitcoin address that has a private key with less than 51 binary digits for storing large amounts (actually, I'd probably go a bit higher than that just to be safe), and would have a feel for how secure addresses with 160 or more bits of entropy would be.
If that is what's going on here, then there may not be a "formula" or "pattern" that can be used. To get the 51st address, you'd just have to brute force try all addresses associated with private keys between 1125899906842624 and 2251799813685248 (which is only about 1.126 X 1015 addresses).
Is there a way that this program can be changed to query every private key to see if it contains any bitcoins, instead of targeting specific predefined private keys?
I think the probability to find a private key that contains some coins are more likely than brute forcing a specific private key?
Looking at the odds, it might be easier to just save up the electricity cost to do this over years, than having enough luck to get 1 private key that contains some coins.
I think the probability to find a private key that contains some coins are more likely than brute forcing a specific private key?
Looking at the odds, it might be easier to just save up the electricity cost to do this over years, than having enough luck to get 1 private key that contains some coins.
Jump to: