How to steal Satoshi's stash? | Bitcointalksearch.org

Carl Quesadilla

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

Quote from: botolo86 on March 09, 2014, 10:44:36 PM

Hello!

This is just for educational purposes. We know that Satoshi has an enormous amount of bitcoins and that he has not moved them for a long time. I think we also know the bitcoin addresses containing those bitcoins.

What if someone wanted to steal those bitcoins? They would need both the public key and private key of the address. I know that it would take an enormous amount of time but is this technically doable?

Also, would mining pools be able to push to their clients a script to find those public and private keys? These pools have nowadays an enormous calculation power.

mine the blockahin Shocked

justice

newbie

Activity: 47

Merit: 0

Quote from: botolo86 on March 09, 2014, 10:51:30 PM

Quote from: seriouscoin on March 09, 2014, 10:49:53 PM

once in a while a dumbass come here and ask the same question.....

then he wonders why hes called dumb

Thanks, I love this spirit.

dude just like
hack his Facebook!

krampus

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Village Idiot

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 02:38:41 PM

Fucked off? I took his own assumption, proved him wrong as you can check for your self

No, you didn't. Not even close. The fact that you still believe you're winning (or making a point, or whatever it is you think you're doing here) is positively comical.

In point of fact, you're still a fucking dumbshit.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 04:03:14 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 14, 2014, 03:36:29 PM

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 03:22:01 PM

considering that according to theoretical physics, bit of information can be stored and produced at the plank lenght!,

Reference?

for example : http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0304/0304032.pdf One of many of course
and http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:gr-qc/9403008v2

Also the whole principal of theories such, as String, Super String, M-Theory is that matter is composed by strings that are on the plank size that are on 10-11 dimensions and this strings can represent a bit if not bits! of information (since these strings, like in the partical scale, they have different states that can be simulated by quantum mechanics principles.

In similar way Quantum gravity theory can give an identical result

Quote from: Syke on March 14, 2014, 04:02:18 PM

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 03:22:01 PM

Good point, and we can go even beyond that, considering that according to theoretical physics, bit of information can be stored and produced at the plank lenght!, and this according to many theories such String, or Quantum Gravity......

Seriously? Next you're going to posit that Satoshi used a private key based on the serial number of a $1 in his pocket. Hey, it's possible! Quick, everyone, check your $1 bills! You might have the key to Satoshis Stash!

It is pretty understandable that these theories are out of the reach of many, I myself don't understand a lot of the maths behind them when I try to go deap, but if you don't understand what I'm talking about it is better to remain silent or even better ask questions but from there to try to discredit people just because of your own ignorance, and because you disagree with them is counterproductive to say the least.
"'Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt."
Johnson, Dr Samuel

I'll give you credit for your open-mindedness and research,
and its interesting reading.

That being said, even without understanding all the math
in the papers you posted, its clear that this stuff is
100% postulation with no empirical evidence
given to back up even the starting assumptions.

I'm done "debating" here, but I think that when you take stuff like
this and make predictions about where computers might be in
a few decades, well, no wonder you're getting resistance.

g4c

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 14, 2014, 03:42:00 PM

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:34:41 PM

Quote from: Bigeyeone on March 14, 2014, 02:24:24 PM

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:03:46 PM

There MUST be a more efficient way than brute-force.

Of course a reverse hash function would be the golden ticket.

More attainable might be some function to produce a smaller set to brute-force.

Watch out Satoshi!... Cheesy

reverse hash is just nonsense, Ill hash a video file for you and give you the hash, then you have to reverse the hash to the original video file, there is no way this can be done.

of course it would be impossible to reconstruct a 16gigabyte == 2^37 bit file from its 256bit hash.

but remember that a private key is only 256 bits.

256 bit is the output of SHA-256. input can be any length, including a 16gig file.

I know what a "one way" hash function is.

Last time i checked Bitcoin private keys were 256bit in length, why all the talk of other key sizes Huh

you needn't think of forging keys of any length other than 256bit.

p.s.
i'm not saying it's possible or impossible, just keeping an open mind.

Carl Quesadilla

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

SatoshiCoin, the only coin leveraged on 2850 BTC. BITCOIN THE NEXT GENERATION!!!!!!!!!!!

g4c

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 14, 2014, 03:34:08 PM

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:57:51 PM

inspiration for any reverse hash function hunters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p08_KlTKP50

Obviously fluid dynamics are very different from
cryptography, but still that is pretty cool.

yes it's only inspiration; at the time before laminar flow was known of it must have seemed unbelievable.

kuroman

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 501

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 14, 2014, 03:36:29 PM

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 03:22:01 PM

considering that according to theoretical physics, bit of information can be stored and produced at the plank lenght!,

Reference?

for example : http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0304/0304032.pdf One of many of course
and http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:gr-qc/9403008v2

Also the whole principal of theories such as String, Super String, M-Theory is that matter is composed by strings that are on the plank size that are on 10-11 dimensions and this strings can represent a bit if not bits! of information (since these strings, like in the partical scale, they have different states that can be simulated by quantum mechanics principles.

In similar way Quantum gravity theory can give an identical result

Quote from: Syke on March 14, 2014, 04:02:18 PM

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 03:22:01 PM

Good point, and we can go even beyond that, considering that according to theoretical physics, bit of information can be stored and produced at the plank lenght!, and this according to many theories such String, or Quantum Gravity......

Seriously? Next you're going to posit that Satoshi used a private key based on the serial number of a $1 in his pocket. Hey, it's possible! Quick, everyone, check your $1 bills! You might have the key to Satoshis Stash!

It is pretty understandable that these theories are out of the reach of many, I myself don't understand a lot of the maths behind them when I try to go deap, but if you don't understand what I'm talking about it is better to remain silent or even better ask questions but from there to try to discredit people just because of your own ignorance, and because you disagree with them is counterproductive to say the least.
"'Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt."
Johnson, Dr Samuel

Syke

legendary

Activity: 3878

Merit: 1193

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 03:22:01 PM

Good point, and we can go even beyond that, considering that according to theoretical physics, bit of information can be stored and produced at the plank lenght!, and this according to many theories such String, or Quantum Gravity......

Seriously? Next you're going to posit that Satoshi used a private key based on the serial number of a $1 in his pocket. Hey, it's possible! Quick, everyone, check your $1 bills! You might have the key to Satoshis Stash!

Mobo

member

Activity: 84

Merit: 10

Its simple: We kill the batman.

But on a serious note, you cant i believe, they are unspendable.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:34:41 PM

Quote from: Bigeyeone on March 14, 2014, 02:24:24 PM

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:03:46 PM

There MUST be a more efficient way than brute-force.

Of course a reverse hash function would be the golden ticket.

More attainable might be some function to produce a smaller set to brute-force.

Watch out Satoshi!... Cheesy

reverse hash is just nonsense, Ill hash a video file for you and give you the hash, then you have to reverse the hash to the original video file, there is no way this can be done.

of course it would be impossible to reconstruct a 16gigabyte == 2^37 bit file from its 256bit hash.

but remember that a private key is only 256 bits.

256 bit is the output of SHA-256. input can be any length, including a 16gig file.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: kuroman on March 14, 2014, 03:22:01 PM

considering that according to theoretical physics, bit of information can be stored and produced at the plank lenght!,

Reference?

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1008

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:57:51 PM

inspiration for any reverse hash function hunters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p08_KlTKP50

Obviously fluid dynamics are very different from
cryptography, but still that is pretty cool.

kuroman

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 501

Quote from: ?? on ??

Sorry, but you are thinking inside the box of todays technology.
Come back after you study fractal computing (using light waves instead of those atoms).
Electromagnetic waves are the answer.

Good point, and we can go even beyond that, considering that according to theoretical physics, bit of information can be stored and produced at the plank lenght!, and this according to many theories such String, or Quantum Gravity......theories, these are indeed still far from our grasp (the math is there but we are still far far away from proving things trough experimentation and observations in these fields, but it was the same thing happened with General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics in the past century, we've moved from theories on paper, to stuff we can use and we use in our every day life.

g4c

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

inspiration for any reverse hash function hunters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p08_KlTKP50

kuroman

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 501

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on March 12, 2014, 09:41:54 PM

The example provided was as extreme as I could get
1) assumes 1 key per FLOP (more like 1 key per 80,000 integer ops)
2) assumes moore's law will continue for 40 years (20 if we are lucky)
3) assumes 1 super computer per human on the planet (really)

Even that would be insufficient. Yet you still stick with a belief that 10^70 is realistic. There are only 10^50 atoms on the planet. Even assuming terrahertz scale processor you would need to convert the entire planet into chips and then magically process billions of operations per atom. What is going to power this? Where are all the organic life going to go?

Feel free to have the last (delusional) word. I won't see it because it isn't worth my time anymore. You can have your own opinions but you can't have your own facts. 128 bit keys are beyond brute force with classical computing. It doesn't matter if it is today, next decade, next millennium, or using a perfect computer and all the matter and energy in our solar system.

He seems to have f*cked off now; strange!

I know this is not thread-related but D&T I fucking love you man. I have no idea how you manage to respond to people like this without losing it and each response seems to contain more damning evidence than the last... Unbelievable.

Anyway thanks, and kuroman no offense but you are the most stupid "educated person" I have encountered for a while on these forums. And welcome to ignore Wink

Fucked off? I took his own assumption, proved him wrong as you can check for your self (in the post above the one you quoted and HE doesn't disagree with anything I said but of course it seems that you've missed that), and then he posted the above saying that the numbers HE took are optimistic, so he backed of, please explain to me how can you argue with someone, that tells you lets assume this and that, and when you prove with his own calculus, assumptions and numbers that he is wrong and that his argument works in my favors and goes with everything I said before, then he just backs off!, saying "oh noes, but things don't go the way I presented before" . No offense to you but the stupid person here is the one not able to gasp this fact, if I go trough the trouble to prove him (and you by the same occasion) wrong again he'll just again back off and say " but what I said is not really accurate, we have to take this and that into consideration aswell.

And as they say in Africa : "Only a fool tests the water with both feet."

g4c

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

Quote from: Bigeyeone on March 14, 2014, 02:24:24 PM

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:03:46 PM

There MUST be a more efficient way than brute-force.

Of course a reverse hash function would be the golden ticket.

More attainable might be some function to produce a smaller set to brute-force.

Watch out Satoshi!... Cheesy

reverse hash is just nonsense, Ill hash a video file for you and give you the hash, then you have to reverse the hash to the original video file, there is no way this can be done.

of course it would be impossible to reconstruct a 16gigabyte == 2^37 bit file from its 256bit hash.

but remember that a private key is only 256 bits.

Bigeyeone

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: g4c on March 14, 2014, 02:03:46 PM

There MUST be a more efficient way than brute-force.

Of course a reverse hash function would be the golden ticket.

More attainable might be some function to produce a smaller set to brute-force.

Watch out Satoshi!... Cheesy

reverse hash is just nonsense, Ill hash a video file for you and give you the hash, then you have to reverse the hash to the original video file, there is no way this can be done.

fran2k

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

If GPU mining becames worthless, miners will switch to mining wallets with some kind of p2p-hashcat, hehehe.

g4c

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 10

There MUST be a more efficient way than brute-force.

Of course a reverse hash function would be the golden ticket.

More attainable might be some function to produce a smaller set to brute-force.

Watch out Satoshi!... Cheesy

Topic: How to steal Satoshi's stash? (Read 12820 times)