Topic: [List] VanityGen Wallet Generation - threads, how to & links (Read 1321 times)

And for the OCD among us, or at least those who have the great idea that I will get organized *soon* it allows us to categorize some things.
i.e. bc1qCarStuff...... or bc1qH0tSauce.... or bc1qC0llect and so on.

Decoders MUST NOT accept strings where some characters are uppercase and some are lowercase (such strings are referred to as mixed case strings).

Hey thanks for the advice.

Does it work on a NUC PC?

It's been years since I had a box with graphics cards.

Just for testing reasons, I have developed a Vanity Address generator in Java. Here is the thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/vanity-address-generator-in-java-5467234 Feel free to check it out.

could you research   1957philipma any case or spot.

Why not use labels in your wallet for this? By using vanity addresses as labels, you're basically making your labels public. It's bad for privacy.

You made me curious how many of the 1,219,157,164 used Bitcoin addresses contain "LoyceV" (case insensitive):

The list is a lot longer with "DaveF" (1699 entries)

Why not use labels in your wallet for this? By using vanity addresses as labels, you're basically making your labels public. It's bad for privacy.

You made me curious how many of the 1,219,157,164 used Bitcoin addresses contain "LoyceV" (case insensitive):

The list is a lot longer with "DaveF" (1699 entries)

And for the OCD among us, or at least those who have the great idea that I will get organized *soon* it allows us to categorize some things.
i.e. bc1qCarStuff...... or bc1qH0tSauce.... or bc1qC0llect and so on.

So this way looking back later I would be able to figure out what was what without searching though a bunch of random addresses.
Have not really been doing it, but there was that plan....

For example, let's say that your regular address is 1LoyceVg9r*******

I get the feeling vanity addresses lost popularity after Segwit. I still use one (for historical reasons), but that's it. It's not worth the additional transaction fee, and bc1q-vanity addresses look much less nice.

I get the feeling vanity addresses lost popularity after Segwit. I still use one (for historical reasons), but that's it. It's not worth the additional transaction fee, and bc1q-vanity addresses look much less nice.

Thank you for compiling all this useful info!

Do you know any generator of Bech32 address format?

Have just recalled BitCoinVanityGen website - can anyone recall the URL (dot com??) - I vaguely recall they had the PrivateKeys and emailed them to a user, hence it was considered unsafe.

Say you have N people who each want to find a vanity tweak of their pubkeys which will roughly take M million tries to find.

You can find all N of them with just ~M million tries, instead of the N*M million tries if they were to do them themselves alone.

Here is how.  Each person has a pubkey P_i,   they all come up with uniformly random tweaks T_i.  They tweak their keys, and send these resulting public keys to the hashing server. They keep the tweak and original pubkey private.   They also send the string(s) they want to match. They stay connected.

The sever takes all the strings and compiles them into a single match expression (which can be matched in log() operations at worst, probably better).

Then the server sums all the tweaked pubkeys and grinds on it comparing the output with the omnibus matcher.

When it gets a hit  it then demands all clients except the one with the match to tell them the private keys for their tweaked keys (this reveals nothing about the original private key, since it's been tweaked).    It then sums up the tweak it found and everyone elses private keys and gives that to the lucky user.

Everyone remaining sends new tweaked pubkeys  (probably in the same message they sent their prior private keys).  They get summed and the process continues with the new basepoint.

If someone fails to send their private key, you kick them off and ban them and you lose that result because you cannot reconstruct the tweaks without everyone elses keys.

Implemented correctly this is completely secure.

It's worth mentioning that VanitySearch than vanitygen is up to several times faster at finding private keys to vanity addresses:

---

Other links of potential interest:

Vanitygen Plus:
https://github.com/exploitagency/vanitygen-plus/tree/master/

On my Intel Core i7-4770, VanitySearch runs ~4 times faster than vanitygen64. (1.32 Mkey/s -> 5.27  MK/s)
On my  GeForce GTX 645, VanitySearch runs ~1.5 times faster than oclvanitygen. (9.26 Mkey/s -> 14.548 MK/s)
If you want to compare VanitySearch and Vanitygen result, use the -u option for searching uncompressed address.
VanitySearch may not compute a good gridsize for your GPU, so make several tries using -g options in order to find best performances.
Using compressed addresses is roughly 20% faster.