Topic: Someone sending out MilliBits (Read 16403 times)

As much as this looks like spam at first glance, it is actually very well possible that this person would actually receive some amount of bitcoin to this address from laxo. I have google searched several "random" addresses that have had these transactions sent to and they all (that I have searched) have results that point back to this forum on the first or second result. As a result I would conclude that the addresses are being "mined" from posts on this forum

Im getting a lot of trades of 0.00000001 or something from "fair cargo" or something like that . Weird

mmmm id love a MILlibit!! 
1Cg2eGH1mAxoP6dNK6zt5MhPKBJGm5n9hv

that spam is annoying but well.... what to do

All those addresses that start with 1Ag are Casascius Silver 1BTC Coins.
I own a Casascius Silver/Gold 1BTC: 1Ag5rhfvXE1KYGypZQAujxt3aL2Dy15hUN, which also has dust ( 1 satoshi... ) on it from 1Sochi... No harm publishing the address now that it has already been messed with.
I also have a Titan Tenth 0.1BTC which had 0.00006BTC sent to it just 4 days after it was funded by Titan, sent from 1Enjoy. Now don't get me wrong, free BTC is nice, but it really pisses me off that these are on physical coins, hence I have absolutely no way to remove said dust to get it back to a nice round balance again. Frustrating  If it had been sent to a wallet that I actually have 'access' to, then I'd laugh and remove the dust, and send it to the miners.

Anyone know if this will somehow devalue physical coins like Casascius/Titan/Lealana etc? Or whether it doesn't really make any difference?

Big numbers, I like.



Ente

2^256 is a really, really big number, though. I really doubt this constitutes a feasible attack.

Let's make up some numbers to show you what I mean: let's say that people typically repeat their hash 1 million times, and there are a million such addresses in use. 1 million * 1 million ~= 2^40. This means there are 2^40 random sha256 hashes that, if you repeatedly hash them up to 1 million times, will result in you spending someone else's money. Unfortunately, there are 2^256-2^40 (or roughly 2^256) sha256 hashes that do not result in anything useful.

..for me, that's just another brainwallet :-)
You take some human-compatible input and create a 254bit string from it. Most will use a simple sha256() for this, but a somewhat advanced harvesting-bot would also try several sha256(), reversing the string, doubling the dtring and hashing again, etc.
Regular brute-force alteration.

The lesson should be: "you only have as many bits in your final result as the complexity of the input and the algorithm". Just because the final string is 256bit long, doesn't mean much.

Ente

Maybe.

I have a theory that a lot of private addresses are created by taking sha256 sum repeatedly without additional salts.
I've seen that tactic used a lot with website password hashes - they salt the initial hash but then do X additional hashes without salting.
That's probably fine for passwords, because brute forcing the last hash to be hashed doesn't get you the password.

But with bitcoin if that is done, that means the final hash (all that matters) is done from a limited set of characters of known length.

So generating a random sha256 sum and then doing repeated rinse and repeats *may* boost your odds of a collission.

And while finding a weak brain-wallet might still be higher odds, weak brain-wallet is not likely to have much coins because there are lots of people constantly looking for them to empty. So a lot of the collisions will have 0 balance when you check.

And what stuff about Bitcoin isn't so mysterious ? Boom prices speculation oh yes...

Ente

topic is closed ?

Totally agree. Man up and send me a few whole bitcoins already!

I'd like to get some more millibits

i'd like some more transactions from awesome addresses like 1Enjoy... and 1Sochi...
maybe something along the lines of 1Enjoy... 1Worldcup... 

Just got some on a few addresses, some even twice...has this mystery been solved yet?

Possible, but not be best way.
1) It would be more efficient to hunt for already used addresses, as the older addresses have more coins than the addresses in the future.
2) You don't need to actually send funds to an address to "watch" it. You generate billions of addresses, and check in the blockchain if any of those has funds on.
3) It is completely senseless to "mine" for random addresses. It makes more sense to hunt for weak brainwallets.

The address space is 256 bit. This is what that means, practically:



Ente

Most newcomers can't mine because the bar is set too high but faucets pay in MilliBits.

Generate as many address/key pairs as you can, continuously, using any method you think someone else might employ to generate their future wallet. Flit some coins in and out to get it's address showing up in your coind. Set up a script to watch your wallets. You'll need a farm of them. There is going to be some bumps with millions of accounts in 1 wallet. Each wallet gets a daemon to track the balance of the wallet, if it increases, withdraw the funds. Script the creation of new wallet nodes, deploy, expand. wait. Maybe you get lucky, maybe you waste a few thousand a year on hosting and electricity for generating endless keypairs. As more people create/move/transact, more addresses get used, the likelihood of success with this type of method increases as the coin becomes more adopted, which likely would increase it's value. If you hit a lucky address, it would be quite worth the effort. You probably never will, but again, with rpc calls, image deployment, cheap plug computers and botnets and ever decreasing hosted compute/cheaper arms coming along, there's very little investment in just creating endless keypairs and hoping for a rich twin one day. People bet on long shots all the time. On occasion they get lucky.

Just my random thought.

I should probably add the point of my mind exercise was not to advise you to actually do this, but to encourage not using a 'method' in building something that should provide security based on obscurity. It might also encourage more people to investigate multisig addresses.

You're funny, thx for the laugh