amaclin, can you explain?
I visit this board not very often. For fast reply PM me with a link
Looks like someone put a challenge for breaking weak signatures:
I think somebody is testing his bot for redeeming leaked private keys.
I was talking with some guys about cryptography and ecdsa, may be one of them
decided to join our company exploring blockchain in real-time
This is not his first attempt
The first output used k=1 when spent. This was broken immediately by a bot.
I am sure that 1ASPNUU belongs to the author of these transactions
The second output used the same k as a previous transaction of 19iAvuzfb8uH2SZLYcbb5wtbBZdn1o3vRm.
The latter is probably a weak brainwallet or something similar. I didn't break it though. amaclin, can you explain?
You are right. But I can not tell you more info. I have a key-value database {priv
32->pub
32}
but I do not store when and where I got these datas
The third output has k=private key. I solved the challenge and collected.
congrats!
(its a pity that my math is not so strong. i will try to solve it too.)
The fourth output is still unsolved.
The other four outputs are not yet spent. I guess we still have to
wait for the challenge. Or maybe the address is weak for some other reason.
I doubt that this challenge would be public contest.
For my point of view somebody is testing signing bitcoin transactions with deterministic-generated
signatures for resolving the private keys of his victims later by analyzing the blockchain.
The function k () can depends on digest, public key and some other data.
for example
k = digest or
k = inv (digest) or even
k = sha256 ( digest | pubkey )By the way,
I have some research about 2-of-3 msig addresses with a key of 1BgGZ9tcN4rm9KBzDn7KprQz87SZ26SAMH
