Topic: Vanity Pool - vanity address generator pool (Read 148044 times)

You were right vanitygen gives 100% match when searching for a prefix with a public key, but it works almost 20 times slower because it does not support Nvidia cards!

  I've gone through every inch of the SC of VS , his functions are incomplete when using a pub key with prefix.  Theres no discarding splitkeys in vs. if a function checks out .if it just so happens to find a child wallet it tells you that's fine. The other program doesn't. But it's nowhere near as complex as VS

The only question I really have is why does this happen with LEGACY wallets!  Why do legacy wallets have child keys?

There are more people who would probably know what's going on here  if they see the post. I didn't get into VS until 2019 or so.

I use VanitySearch for searching, with a special search scheme, for speeding up. This problem arose only when searching for a prefix with a public key, when searching for a prefix without it, 100% match of results. I also thought that when using a public key, the match should also be 100%, but it turns out that no, for what reason I can not answer exactly, maybe because elliptic curves are used for calculations or this is a bug in the program or memory without error correction, it is not clear yet why this happens, too little data and it takes months to accumulate it. Maybe there were no problems before because the prefixes were not complicated and it was possible to quickly find another option.

if you used VS you got lucky. The other one discards child keys automatically, JeanLuc should have implemented this into vs.

I broke it down pretty well in the post above. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.64820642

Which software do you use to find a work item solution (I might've missed it in case you already wrote about it)?

Did you modify the software in any way?


I can't remember having issues to submit the first hit of a work item solution many many years ago when vanitypool was rather new and there were plenty of not terribly hard work items available (GPUs back then weren't as powerful as today's and I only had a barely middle-class one).

It would be against all odds that I was purely lucky that my first found solution to a work item was just one that worked out fine, if there were detected "solutions" that won't spit out the correct public address prefix after combining the keys.

Why would there be something like "1 in 6" chance? That's nonsense in my opinion as I don't see any mathematical proof for such ambiguity. This sounds much like some strange bug in the software.

And I also can't remember any discussion about such an issue in this thread earlier (not that I've followed the many pages of it to the word).

Again:
When I did my split key vanity giveaway, every match I found produced the desired address.

For fun, I checked other key variants for 1iJuniorTV and out of 15 variants, only about 5 matched the prefixes.
1RoseCross found 6 variants and none of them matched the prefixes at all.
So the hardware is fine, or there is a problem with converting two keys or when combining two keys, another variant with a different prefix is ​​possible.
Yes, I also thought that when adding or multiplying two keys there should be a 100% match for the found prefix of the address of the searched, apparently not. According to my data, the probability of a match is about 30%. If you remove the public key search option, Vanity finds 100% correct prefixes.
The same video card found a variant for 1iJuniorTV as for 1RoseCross.
ThePiachu paid me 0.01 BTC from his own funds for the solution for 1iJuniorTV.

If you combine the public key from the requestor with the public key derived from your found private key, the combined public key (added or multiplied, don't remember what vanitypool used) should hash to the requested public address prefix. There's not much room for ambiguity.

I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to tell. Of course the vanitypool website could still have some bugs, but if it doesn't accept your "solution" than I'd rather think something is wrong with your "solution" or your toolset than otherwise.

If you have a correct split-key solution, it will always give the proper public address prefix when combined properly (i.e. not messing up with compressed/uncompressed keys or adding split-keys when multiplying is required or vice-versa).

Out of curiosity: did you receive the payment for your solution of 1iJuniorTV?


Your cited article doesn't have anything to do with vanitypool. I mean, I could be blind and not see a connection, so beat me to it, please.

Why do you bring up the topic of HD wallet address derivation and try to mingle that with split-key combining for a safe vanity public address that someone else has computed for you?

Vanitypool doesn't use an extended master private key or similar BIP32 stuff.

Here's a pretty good writeup explaining it all. TLDR user  generated a child key.

I found goryniche or whatever like 4 times but someone beat me to it.

When I operated 1Splitkey I created (forked) tool and scripted it to check work.

I only learned about child keys through some old programming Bitcoin with CS writeup I found encountering the same issue.

Based on what I've read and researched a master key actually controls or is linked to 5 other wallets by default, even with split keys. Sound familiar?(Multi sig) So no surprise there. I just didn't understand it back then and how it related to legacy address.

Hope this helps clear things up for y'all.

Why does my solution not always match after combining two keys it gives a completely different address? I have found the correct address.
https://gobittest.appspot.com/VanityAll
I checked other options found and they also did not all match; the first symbols of the address were completely different after combining the two keys.

1SatoshiNak      In line for search
1AustriaFTW     Search
1HASHCRACK1   In line for search
1RoseCross       In line for search
1iJuniorTV        The solution was found

ThePiachu Continues to work on fixing payments from the pool site.

Can you explain this? As far as I know, vanity split key matches should be correct and not have a "1 in 6" chance.

1RoseCross
1RoseCrossRd4TQnR9w66mDbpLJcCPqXE
Are there any matches in the conditions of the task?
I'm waiting for ThePiachu to answer.

You found a solution. Not the solution. Try again.
Your keypairs  aren't merging to a known prefix .
You have about a 1 in 6 chance of getting it right the first time.
There is a slight chance something may be going wrong on the backend. But I doubt it. (This is why I'm pretty certain your keypairs are mismatched) Correct solution. Incorrect merged prefix.

I'm not saying Piachu will rug pull but BTC did just hit 100k I'm pretty sure a lot of people are going to exit soon. Just hope your endeavors don't get pulled.

Hi, I found a solution for Searched pattern: 1RoseCross
The payment is not going through to me. Writes: Solution does not match the pattern
Everything is correct, I checked everything again. I wrote about it to ThePiachu. The search took 19 days on the same equipment.


1SatoshiNak      In line for search
1AustriaFTW     Search
1HASHCRACK1   In line for search
1RoseCross       The solution was found
1iJuniorTV         The solution was found

After all those years I didn't expect that, and the website doesn't look like it's ever been updated:

Yes, to place a work item on the list of available work list, the user who ordered the vanity address had to pay in Bitcoin upfront. The site calculated an amount based on the complexity of the vanity address (I don't know all the details, but I remember that I tried and played with the site back in late 2012 or so, evaluating for fun some vanity addresses of varying complexity just to get a feel what requesters were charged for a comparable order and I solved a not so hard work item and got paid for it when I submitted the split-key solution without much delay).

It wasn't very expensive in 2012, but we all know how the value of Bitcoin changed.

Every few months in the past years I was curious to see if anything changed with the last work items. For years almost nothing happened AFAIR. Out of nostalgia, I'm now a bit excited to read that someone actually tackled some of the last reasonably hard work items.

Congrats to @ddf2020 and chapeau! to @ThePiachu who kept the site alive, likely because some people paid good coins to enlist their vanity address work items for others to solve. I find it very admirable that ThePiachu didn't close the site or walk away silently with the coins after all those years. He also could've contacted the requestors and just returned the coins to close the site with clean hands. I'm positively amazed.

I'm wandering if the users who ordered their vanity address will appreciate the solution.

I'm just amazed the site is still active after all those years!

Does that mean the users who "placed an order" for a vanity address paid in Bitcoin years ago, and by now the value of their payment went up a lot?

ThePiachu continues to work on the repair of payments of remuneration through the site, he needs time to resolve this issue! Received payment for 1iJuniorTV from ThePiachu directly in the amount of 0.01BTC.

The search for a solution for this task took 1 month, the modern Nvidia video cards were used several pieces, plus a special search scheme to reduce the time to find the solution! Now I have launched a solution to a solution for another task.

That's likely good news and you may collect your bounty in the end.

I'm curious, do you mind telling us how long you searched for a solution?

What equipment did you use to crunch on this particular problem? Did you search only for this or also for the other available work items?