Topic: ChatGPT wie więcej niż większość tutejszych forumowiczów (Read 215 times)

Nie musiał. Blockchain jest publiczny. Koń, jaki jest, każdy widzi. Wystarczy zacząć od tej transakcji i śledzić ruch na tych adresach: https://mempool.space/tx/08389f34c98c606322740c0be6a7125d9860bb8d5cb182c02f98461e5fa6cd15

...Nie musiał. Blockchain jest publiczny. Koń, jaki jest, każdy widzi. Wystarczy zacząć od tej transakcji i śledzić ruch na tych adresach: https://mempool.space/tx/08389f34c98c606322740c0be6a7125d9860bb8d5cb182c02f98461e5fa6cd15

That changes a lot. Because using totally random key every time would be harder to crack than some deterministic wallet. Now, the big question is: which deterministic wallet was used? Because there are some of them, and they use different algorithms to derive keys.

To better illustrate, why cracking some deterministic wallet may be easier, consider this example: we start from the master private key, and then we use addition to derive keys. We use some hash that contains the master public key, and some nonce, representing the index of our child key. What does it mean in that case?

For example, a very simple, but unsafe method, is to use "childKey=masterKey+SHA-256(masterPubKey||index)", in practice something stronger is used in real implementations, but let's start from that. Then, by inspecting revealed private and public keys, it is possible to focus on that master key, instead of trying to crack child keys alone. Also note that all public keys from 160-256 range are revealed, we can assume that those keys also follow the pattern. And even if there are no coins, then still, we can use those public keys as an additional information in our algorithms.

Let's assume that our masterKey is equal to SHA-256("master"), just to have some deterministic-but-randomly-looking hash to work with:


Then, we can go further and further, by trying to generate child keys, and checking how close we are to the keys from the puzzle. For example, the first 10 keys from this example, looks like that:


And then, we can compare our example with real keys:


And there is more: there is no need to brute force every combination here. If we assume some kind of algorithm, we can make optimizations just for that. So, if we assume that keys are added to the master key, and if mask is calculated with modulo and sum, then we can check selected keys, and create requirements for that master key.

For example, modulo addition, and modulo multiplication, has a nice property, that we can use any order. So, if we have "a+b", or "b+a", then "(a+b)%n" and "(b+a)%n" is also the same. We can also use those rules for multiplication. Then, we don't have to check every single master private key. We can simply assume that if keys are added, then the master key modulo N is in a given range. Then, we can create specific master keys, and skip many of them.

oczywiscie rozumiem czemu nie chcesz sie nimi podzielić, bo własnie chodzi o ten 1% który je wykorzysta, szczególnie jezeli sam jestes zaintersowany

o jakich nagrodach jest mowa?

Status: PARTIALLY SOLVED
Prize: 988.498 BTC (total), 31.998 BTC (won), 956.5 BTC (remaining)
Creator: unknown
Start Date: 2015-01-15

czy twórca podzielił sie kiedyś takimi informacjami?

...Po pierwsze: to nie on. Po drugie...

...

Po pierwsze: to nie on. Po drugie: zapewne pomyliłeś go z tym gościem: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/piotrn-12089

I am the creator.

You are quite right, 161-256 are silly.  I honestly just did not think of this.  What is especially embarrassing, is this did not occur to me once, in two years.  By way of excuse, I was not really thinking much about the puzzle at all.

I will make up for two years of stupidity.  I will spend from 161-256 to the unsolved parts, as you suggest.  In addition, I intend to add further funds.  My aim is to boost the density by a factor of 10, from 0.001*length(key) to 0.01*length(key).  Probably in the next few weeks.  At any rate, when I next have an extended period of quiet and calm, to construct the new transaction carefully.

A few words about the puzzle.  There is no pattern.  It is just consecutive keys from a deterministic wallet (masked with leading 000...0001 to set difficulty).  It is simply a crude measuring instrument, of the cracking strength of the community.

Finally, I wish to express appreciation of the efforts of all developers of new cracking tools and technology.  The "large bitcoin collider" is especially innovative and interesting!

reszty nie podam

czy możesz podać nam listę wszystkich adresów lub czy można je znaleźć gdzieś tutaj na forum?
i gdzie można znaleźć te 160 puzzle bitcoinowe?

✂
Mowa o tych powszechnie znanych 160 puzzlach bitcoinowych. Co mają klucze prywatne w kolejnych potęgach dwójki, a adresy i niektóre klucze publiczne są znane.
Część już opróżniono.

...

ale ciekawostka, jakieś dodatkowe info?

ktoś cos znalazł już, jaki adres jak jest publiczny, itd

jakieś podpowiedzi może, jak i gdzie szukać?

Tak to tylko zostawię:

Chodzi Ci zapewne o serię bitcoinowych zagadek stworzonych przez programistę i kryptografa o pseudonimie "Pip" (przez ThePiachu). Jest to seria 160 zagadek, które Pip umieścił na forum Bitcointalk i innych platformach. Każda z zagadek zawiera wskazówki prowadzące do prywatnego klucza, który pozwala uzyskać dostęp do bitcoinów przechowywanych w danym adresie.