Sorry, why try to solve puzzle 130 and not 66? 
Double the reward with the same number of operations; depending on which program you use.Also, you can't use BSGS for #66.
Topic: Keyhunt - development requests - bug reports - page 5. (Read 11445 times)
Also, you can't use BSGS for #66.
Sorry, why try to solve puzzle 130 and not 66?
What's the largest baby step file someone has created for BSGS?
More than 1 Billion, anyone?
More than 1 Billion, anyone?
Thanks WanderingPhilospher. But oh my god, we stand no chance to crack 130 puzzle any time soon.
Hello, I tried to calculate (using AI help) and I get that at 48 exa keys per second the range will be completed shortly. Where is the mistake?
(2^130 - 1) - 2^129
2^130 is 340282366920938463463374607431768211456
Subtracting 1 gives us:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455
2^129 is 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
Subtracting the start from the end:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455 - 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
= 170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727
Total keys / Keys scanned per second
170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727 / 48,000,000,000,000,000,000
= 3,542 seconds
Running a program to searches 18 exa keys/s is impressive!
I have 16 GB and Core i7, and get only 70 Peta key/s
18 ExKeys/s this is a drop in the ocean, the range is huge, brute force is currently not the best choice for solving the puzzle. Even if random is not a very good idea, you need to look for another approach
P.s.
(2^130 - 1) - 2^129
2^130 is 340282366920938463463374607431768211456
Subtracting 1 gives us:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455
2^129 is 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
Subtracting the start from the end:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455 - 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
= 170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727
Total keys / Keys scanned per second
170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727 / 48,000,000,000,000,000,000
= 3,542 seconds
Bsgs is now holding 18 exa keys/s stable.
Running a program to searches 18 exa keys/s is impressive!
I have 16 GB and Core i7, and get only 70 Peta key/s
18 ExKeys/s this is a drop in the ocean, the range is huge, brute force is currently not the best choice for solving the puzzle. Even if random is not a very good idea, you need to look for another approach
P.s.
Your calculator is broke lol.
(2^129/48000000000000000000) / 86400 (seconds in one day) = 164,102,221,701,841 days to scan entire range.
Also, 2^129 = 680564733841876926926749214863536422912, not 170141183460469231731687303715884105727 as you stated.
But even with your numbers:
(170141183460469231731687303715884105728/48000000000000000000) / 86400 = 41,025,555,425,460 days.
Hello, I tried to calculate (using AI help) and I get that at 48 exa keys per second the range will be completed shortly. Where is the mistake?
(2^130 - 1) - 2^129
2^130 is 340282366920938463463374607431768211456
Subtracting 1 gives us:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455
2^129 is 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
Subtracting the start from the end:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455 - 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
= 170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727
Total keys / Keys scanned per second
170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727 / 48,000,000,000,000,000,000
= 3,542 seconds
Running a program to searches 18 exa keys/s is impressive!
I have 16 GB and Core i7, and get only 70 Peta key/s
18 ExKeys/s this is a drop in the ocean, the range is huge, brute force is currently not the best choice for solving the puzzle. Even if random is not a very good idea, you need to look for another approach
P.s.
https://i.ibb.co/pfR0VDp/2023-11-08-00-14-18.png
(2^130 - 1) - 2^129
2^130 is 340282366920938463463374607431768211456
Subtracting 1 gives us:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455
2^129 is 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
Subtracting the start from the end:
340282366920938463463374607431768211455 - 170141183460469231731687303715884105728
= 170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727
Total keys / Keys scanned per second
170,141,183,460,469,231,731,687,303,715,884,105,727 / 48,000,000,000,000,000,000
= 3,542 seconds
Bsgs is now holding 18 exa keys/s stable.
Running a program to searches 18 exa keys/s is impressive!
I have 16 GB and Core i7, and get only 70 Peta key/s
18 ExKeys/s this is a drop in the ocean, the range is huge, brute force is currently not the best choice for solving the puzzle. Even if random is not a very good idea, you need to look for another approach
P.s.
https://i.ibb.co/pfR0VDp/2023-11-08-00-14-18.png
The whole thing is confusing and I think I need a simple language to understand this. I think this development gonna be interesting if well explain, am new here thanks
Your contribution makes no sense, there is neither any information or added value nor any question. Are you a person who mainly posts anything (for whatever reason) or one of the countless bots that are up to mischief? You registered today and spreading around, a rogue who thinks evil.
Summarize your questions or statements so that they make sense or save yourself the post. Thank you
That's probably Digaran, lmao
No, not this time. The user is not connected to it, at least not according to the database records and metadata available and its artificial intelligent analysis.
but still far too much garbage posted in the forum. The whole thing is confusing and I think I need a simple language to understand this. I think this development gonna be interesting if well explain, am new here thanks
Your contribution makes no sense, there is neither any information or added value nor any question. Are you a person who mainly posts anything (for whatever reason) or one of the countless bots that are up to mischief? You registered today and spreading around, a rogue who thinks evil.
Summarize your questions or statements so that they make sense or save yourself the post. Thank you
That's probably Digaran, lmao
Do you have plans to add a BrainWallet search mode by dictionary or mask?
No, sorry that is outside of the scope of this tool, the only thing that is near of that is the minikey option.
But I have no plans to add any of that, it include no dictionary search, no hexadecimal key check, no brain wallet.
If you want to do brain wallet search use brainflayer that tools is good and its already developed.
Hi Alberto,
I'd like to be able to specify a range for the ripemd160 scan, with the ability to scan either forwards or backwards in that range. Is this possible at the moment?
thanks
cc
The whole thing is confusing and I think I need a simple language to understand this. I think this development gonna be interesting if well explain, am new here thanks
Your contribution makes no sense, there is neither any information or added value nor any question. Are you a person who mainly posts anything (for whatever reason) or one of the countless bots that are up to mischief? You registered today and spreading around, a rogue who thinks evil.
Summarize your questions or statements so that they make sense or save yourself the post. Thank you
The whole thing is confusing and I think I need a simple language to understand this. I think this development gonna be interesting if well explain, am new here thanks
Do you have plans to add a BrainWallet search mode by dictionary or mask?
No, sorry that is outside of the scope of this tool, the only thing that is near of that is the minikey option.
But I have no plans to add any of that, it include no dictionary search, no hexadecimal key check, no brain wallet.
If you want to do brain wallet search use brainflayer that tools is good and its already developed.
Hello Alberto!
Do you have plans to add a BrainWallet search mode by dictionary or mask?
Do you have plans to add a BrainWallet search mode by dictionary or mask?
hi albert0bsd,
I found keyhunt wont stop even out of range , I test
./keyhunt -m address -f tests/1to32.txt -r 1:FFFF
it seems the hunter wont stop and keep running ....
I found keyhunt wont stop even out of range , I test
./keyhunt -m address -f tests/1to32.txt -r 1:FFFF
it seems the hunter wont stop and keep running ....
Default subrange per thread is 0x100000000 if you want it to to stop in the given range reduce the subrange N value per thread.
Add -n 0x400
1024 is the minimum value so please increment your range -n to a minimum of 24 bits this is 0x1000000 or
-r 1:1000000 -n 0x400
hi albert0bsd,
I found keyhunt wont stop even out of range , I test
./keyhunt -m address -f tests/1to32.txt -r 1:FFFF
it seems the hunter wont stop and keep running ....
Hit! Private Key: 1ba534
pubkey: 031a746c78f72754e0be046186df8a20cdce5c79b2eda76013c647af08d306e49e
Address 14oFNXucftsHiUMY8uctg6N487riuyXs4h
rmd160 29a78213caa9eea824acf08022ab9dfc83414f56
Hit! Private Key: 2de40f
pubkey: 023ed96b524db5ff4fe007ce730366052b7c511dc566227d929070b9ce917abb43
Address 1CfZWK1QTQE3eS9qn61dQjV89KDjZzfNcv
rmd160 7ff45303774ef7a52fffd8011981034b258cb86b
Hit! Private Key: 556e52
pubkey: 03f82710361b8b81bdedb16994f30c80db522450a93e8e87eeb07f7903cf28d04b
Address 1L2GM8eE7mJWLdo3HZS6su1832NX2txaac
rmd160 d0a79df189fe1ad5c306cc70497b358415da579e
^C
if its possible split puzzle job in many pieces just like miner workers in mining pool?
I found keyhunt wont stop even out of range , I test
./keyhunt -m address -f tests/1to32.txt -r 1:FFFF
it seems the hunter wont stop and keep running ....
Hit! Private Key: 1ba534
pubkey: 031a746c78f72754e0be046186df8a20cdce5c79b2eda76013c647af08d306e49e
Address 14oFNXucftsHiUMY8uctg6N487riuyXs4h
rmd160 29a78213caa9eea824acf08022ab9dfc83414f56
Hit! Private Key: 2de40f
pubkey: 023ed96b524db5ff4fe007ce730366052b7c511dc566227d929070b9ce917abb43
Address 1CfZWK1QTQE3eS9qn61dQjV89KDjZzfNcv
rmd160 7ff45303774ef7a52fffd8011981034b258cb86b
Hit! Private Key: 556e52
pubkey: 03f82710361b8b81bdedb16994f30c80db522450a93e8e87eeb07f7903cf28d04b
Address 1L2GM8eE7mJWLdo3HZS6su1832NX2txaac
rmd160 d0a79df189fe1ad5c306cc70497b358415da579e
^C
if its possible split puzzle job in many pieces just like miner workers in mining pool?
Quote
Hi 1qaz,
It seems the memory is 1 TB. Can I please know what CPUs are being used in the screen shot ?
Thanks!
Hello I run the ttdsales 66 bit pool and am trying out your software for the purpose of consideration of making a 130 bit pool.
compiling was a breeze
I like the options you have built in. I am mostly just interested in the BSGS mode and particularly interested in setups with massive amounts of ram.
My test rig is a dual cpu 2697 v2 with 512GB ram for a total of 24 cores and 48 logical processors.
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 8192 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S
I can not for the life of me get it to use more ram. Increasing k value or n value is causing error bloom_init
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 16384 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 8192 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S -n 0x200000000000
[E] M value is not divisible by 1024
not sure why that error is happening
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 8192 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S -n 0x400000000000
same as before.
pretty sure if I can make it take advantage of 4 times the ram I can get 4 times the speed.
Anyway I appreciate the help and understanding you can provide.
Chris
compiling was a breeze
I like the options you have built in. I am mostly just interested in the BSGS mode and particularly interested in setups with massive amounts of ram.
My test rig is a dual cpu 2697 v2 with 512GB ram for a total of 24 cores and 48 logical processors.
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 8192 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S
Code:
[+] Version 0.2.230519 Satoshi Quest, developed by AlbertoBSD
[+] Random mode
[+] K factor 8192
[+] Quiet thread output
[+] Threads : 40
[+] Stats output every 10 seconds
[+] Mode BSGS random
[+] Opening file tests/130.txt
[+] Added 1 points from file
[+] Bit Range 130
[+] -- from : 0x200000000000000000000000000000000
[+] -- to : 0x400000000000000000000000000000000
[+] N = 0x100000000000
[+] Bloom filter for 34359738368 elements : 117781.20 MB
[+] Bloom filter for 1073741824 elements : 3680.66 MB
[+] Bloom filter for 33554432 elements : 115.02 MB
[+] Allocating 512.00 MB for 33554432 bP Points
[+] Reading bloom filter from file keyhunt_bsgs_4_34359738368.blm .... Done!
[+] Reading bloom filter from file keyhunt_bsgs_6_1073741824.blm .... Done!
[+] Reading bP Table from file keyhunt_bsgs_2_33554432.tbl .... Done!
[+] Reading bloom filter from file keyhunt_bsgs_7_33554432.blm .... Done!
[+] Total 22563756609022657036288 keys in 14460 seconds: ~1 Ekeys/s (1560425768258828287 keys/s)
I can not for the life of me get it to use more ram. Increasing k value or n value is causing error bloom_init
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 16384 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S
- Bloom filter for 68719476736 elements [E] error bloom_init _ [45]
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 8192 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S -n 0x200000000000
[E] M value is not divisible by 1024
not sure why that error is happening
keyhunt -m bsgs -f tests/130.txt -b 130 -R -k 8192 -q -t 40 -s 10 -S -n 0x400000000000
- Bloom filter for 68719476736 elements [E] error bloom_init _ [45]
same as before.
pretty sure if I can make it take advantage of 4 times the ram I can get 4 times the speed.
Anyway I appreciate the help and understanding you can provide.
Chris
Well if your setup uses a lot of electricity or if it's overheating, then it's best to stop searching.
Bsgs is now holding 18 exa keys/s stable.
Running a program to searches 18 exa keys/s is impressive!
I have 16 GB and Core i7, and get only 70 Peta key/s
Just uped my ram to 512 gig
51 Exa keys/s
My rig will hold up to 2 terrabtes of ram. Just $$$
Bsgs is now holding 18 exa keys/s stable.
Running a program to searches 18 exa keys/s is impressive!
I have 16 GB and Core i7, and get only 70 Peta key/s
18 ExKeys/s this is a drop in the ocean, the range is huge, brute force is currently not the best choice for solving the puzzle. Even if random is not a very good idea, you need to look for another approach
P.s.
Still a chance, and this is what this puzzle is about.
Are you suggesting I stop searching?
Btw I will also be donating to Alberto if I find any.
Bsgs is now holding 18 exa keys/s stable.
Running a program to searches 18 exa keys/s is impressive!
I have 16 GB and Core i7, and get only 70 Peta key/s
18 ExKeys/s this is a drop in the ocean, the range is huge, brute force is currently not the best choice for solving the puzzle. Even if random is not a very good idea, you need to look for another approach
P.s.
Jump to: