VanitySearch (Yet another address prefix finder) - page 48.

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4326

Merit: 8951

Quote from: Jean_Luc on May 03, 2019, 02:54:56 AM

OS random number are still coming from PNRG and a failure might always be found on them.

The OS is going to be much more random than the user, even if the OS has issues. Moreover, if the user's OS rng is faulty then their security would be totally broken in every other respect as well.

If you want to be paranoid you can combine the OS randomness with user provided keyboard mashing using a cryptographic hash... but please don't just depend on users to provide a truly random value on their own: humans are notoriously bad at it, and that structure reliably results in funds loss.

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Quote from: gmaxwell on May 03, 2019, 02:13:18 AM

Every operating system offers a source of cryptographically strong random numbers. Why isn't it using 256-bits (or at least 128 bits) of OS provided entropy?

At the beginning the default seed was used especially to allow the program to be run easily and I always recommend to users to use a seed for generating safe keys. You're right, it is better to suppress the default seed and to force user to use a password or a split key. OS random number are still coming from PNRG and a failure might always be found on them.

gmaxwell

staff

Activity: 4326

Merit: 8951

Quote from: Jean_Luc on May 02, 2019, 11:29:23 PM

The default seed has an entropy of ~48bit (if you manage to guess the date of the address creation),

That is inexcusably small, and adding a PID to it wouldn't make it meaningfully better.

Strengthening can be a useful tool in the rare case where there isn't any alternative, but it doesn't replace having good entropy to begin with. The only systems that should use weak entropy (plus strengthening) are ones where the unrelated-to-you brute force attackers shouldn't exist (e.g. where they need a secret database to even begin the attack) and where there can be a strong nonce to prevent parallel attack speedups and precomputation.

Every operating system offers a source of cryptographically strong random numbers. Why isn't it using 256-bits (or at least 128 bits) of OS provided entropy?

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: Jean_Luc on May 02, 2019, 03:19:43 PM

Yes if you don't use a seed, for very short prefix. But it will still require lot's of power.
Again, I recommend to use a strong password (-s option) to generate safe base key.

And I recommend to the community not to use this, if he doesn't modify it.

The default seed has an entropy of ~48bit (if you manage to guess the date of the address creation), so to guess a key generated by the default seed used by VanitySearch, you need to execute ~2^48 pbkdf2_hmac_sha512 and to run ~2^48 times the search up to the desired prefix. I let you do the calculation of the necessary power to compute an address in a feasible time when you know the day of an address creation Wink

But ok, I will modify the code and add the PID, it will add 16 more bits to the default seed entropy.

There are 2 ways to generate safe addresses:

1) Use a strong seed.
2) Use a split key (-sp) with a public key generated by a third party software (In that case, VanitySearch cannot suffer from any vulnerability)

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Quote from: ?? on ??

On page ten of this thread, you concede there is at least one exploit for someone resourceful, assuming you know what you are saying or doing.

Yes if you don't use a seed, for very short prefix. But it will still require lot's of power.
Again, I recommend to use a strong password (-s option) to generate safe base key.

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Quote from: ?? on ??

I don't, you do, and if you want people to use it, you are going to have to do something.

The way pbkdf2_hmac_sha512 is implemented is safe, long passwords (>128 characters for SHA512) are truncated to 128.
No change needed here unless someone finds a trap of really wants password longer than 128 char.

Quote from: ?? on ??

Hi,

I just remembered a few features of "profanity" used for ETH-addresses:

Code:

--letters Score on letters anywhere in hash.
--numbers Score on numbers anywhere in hash.
--mirror Score on mirroring from center.

Source: https://github.com/johguse/profanity

Would it be possible to implement those "modes" into VanitySearch?

Hi,
Yes it could be done but I still have work with fast base58 encoding and I will be off the next week.

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Why do you want to implement in a different way ?

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

and ?
did you manage to exploit something ?

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Quote from: stortz on May 01, 2019, 03:15:35 PM

also, Is it possible to add this address to a specific electrum wallet? I don't think it's possible without creating a new wallet, correct?

You can use Wallet->Private keys>Import to import address(es) (giving the corresponding private key(s)) in the current opened wallet.
I'm using Electrum 3.3.4.

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Thanks to all for these performance reports. I appreciate it

Note that the Tesla V100 result was with an old release.
If i compare to the result of the 1080 ti posted in the same SlarkBoy's post, 1255M/Ks for 2 1080Ti, (627MK/s per board), and the result from here (1001 MK/s) we may expect a 60% speed increase on the Tesla with last VanitySearch release (~2800MK/s).

Lolo54

member

Activity: 131

Merit: 32

Quote

I underclock my cards so I'm not sure I should post the speeds, but I can say that the 2070 outperforms the 1080ti and even the liquid cooled model by a little bit, and uses significantly less power while doing so. The 2070 is a great buy for this purpose in my opinion.

Exact OgNasty the RTX 2070 is the best performance / price compromise .... just look at the TESLA V100 $ 10000 scores for 50% extra speed or a 2080 TI twice as expensive as a 2070 but for a result that is not doubled in terms of speed ... if in addition we take into account the power consumption the RTX 2070 is very correct

stortz

jr. member

Activity: 40

Merit: 15

Quote from: Jean_Luc on March 18, 2019, 01:53:09 AM

Hello,

Quote from: stortz on March 17, 2019, 05:43:52 PM

it ran, but just closed after finding it
did it generate the private keys into a file?
I am confused

To output the key in a file, use the -o option.

Code:

VanitySearch -stop -gpu -o key.txt 1stortz

Many thanks stivensons for the report

this setup worked
perhaps you should make it as a default setting

Code:

-stop -gpu -o key.txt 1

this is the code I added to the shortcut to the program, as you pointed. It worked perfectly.

edit:
also, Is it possible to add this address to a specific electrum wallet? I don't think it's possible without creating a new wallet, correct?

OgNasty

donator

Activity: 4760

Merit: 4323

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: DaveF on May 01, 2019, 01:55:58 PM

Quote from: escope on May 01, 2019, 01:42:02 PM

Quote from: Jean_Luc on May 01, 2019, 01:10:18 AM

Wildcard search is between 4 and 5 times slower than classic search for known prefixes. I reach ~40MK/s with my 1050 Ti and ~4MK/s with my i7-4770.
It is due to the fact that I have to compute full address each time and it requires 2 SHA for the checksum and a base58 encoding. For the CPU release, I implemented SSE checksum and I will try to implement SSE Base58 encoding using Barret's reduction (for computing div and mod 58).

Thank you very very much! I am really looking forward to a new commit.

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

Has anyone put together (or started to put together) a list of CPUs / Video Cards & the speed you can get out of them.
Anything else?

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce GTX 750 (4x128 cores) Grid(32x128)
104.960 MK/s (GPU 94.405 MK/s) (2^32.12)

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 2070 (36x64 cores) Grid(288x128)
1535.880 MK/s (GPU 1470.257 MK/s)

Oh my take my money I want buy that now

1) added
2) Amazon. The source of all things: https://amzn.to/2Li0UsI

-Dave

I underclock my cards so I'm not sure I should post the speeds, but I can say that the 2070 outperforms the 1080ti and even the liquid cooled model by a little bit, and uses significantly less power while doing so. The 2070 is a great buy for this purpose in my opinion.

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: escope on May 01, 2019, 01:42:02 PM

Quote from: Jean_Luc on May 01, 2019, 01:10:18 AM

Wildcard search is between 4 and 5 times slower than classic search for known prefixes. I reach ~40MK/s with my 1050 Ti and ~4MK/s with my i7-4770.
It is due to the fact that I have to compute full address each time and it requires 2 SHA for the checksum and a base58 encoding. For the CPU release, I implemented SSE checksum and I will try to implement SSE Base58 encoding using Barret's reduction (for computing div and mod 58).

Thank you very very much! I am really looking forward to a new commit.

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

Has anyone put together (or started to put together) a list of CPUs / Video Cards & the speed you can get out of them.
Anything else?

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce GTX 750 (4x128 cores) Grid(32x128)
104.960 MK/s (GPU 94.405 MK/s) (2^32.12)

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 2070 (36x64 cores) Grid(288x128)
1535.880 MK/s (GPU 1470.257 MK/s)

Oh my take my money I want buy that now

1) added
2) Amazon. The source of all things: https://amzn.to/2Li0UsI

-Dave

escope

newbie

Activity: 13

Merit: 24

Quote from: Jean_Luc on May 01, 2019, 01:10:18 AM

Wildcard search is between 4 and 5 times slower than classic search for known prefixes. I reach ~40MK/s with my 1050 Ti and ~4MK/s with my i7-4770.
It is due to the fact that I have to compute full address each time and it requires 2 SHA for the checksum and a base58 encoding. For the CPU release, I implemented SSE checksum and I will try to implement SSE Base58 encoding using Barret's reduction (for computing div and mod 58).

Thank you very very much! I am really looking forward to a new commit.

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

Has anyone put together (or started to put together) a list of CPUs / Video Cards & the speed you can get out of them.
Anything else?

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce GTX 750 (4x128 cores) Grid(32x128)
104.960 MK/s (GPU 94.405 MK/s) (2^32.12)

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 2070 (36x64 cores) Grid(288x128)
1535.880 MK/s (GPU 1470.257 MK/s)

Oh my take my money I want buy that now

Lolo54

member

Activity: 131

Merit: 32

Bonjour
You can add it https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50108268

Code:

C: \ VanitySearch> VanitySearch.exe -stop -gpu -gpuId 0,1,2,3 1SLarkBoyKEK
Début Dim 10 mars 2019 22:26:19
Difficulté: 583137945833742401536Search: 1SLarkBoyKEK
base clé: 7098934A348028B578A730116289AC3A6BB56AFF8664117F5CE69920A360A4E9
Nombre de thread CPU: 31
GPU: GPU # 0 Tesla V100-SXM2-16GB (80x64 noyaux) Grille (640x128)
GPU: GPU n ° 3 Tesla V100-SXM2-16GB (80x64 noyaux) Grille (640x128)
GPU: GPU n ° 2 Tesla V100-SXM2-16GB (80x64 cœurs) Grille (640x128)
GPU: GPU n ° 1 Tesla V100-SXM2-16GB (80x64 cœurs) Grille (640x128)
7260.449 MK / s (GPU 7212.931 MK / s) (2 ^ 36.56) [P 0.00%] [50.00% en 1765.33y ] [0]

Jean_Luc

sr. member

Activity: 462

Merit: 701

Many thanks for your report Dave Wink

Some news:
Wildcard search is between 4 and 5 times slower than classic search for known prefixes. I reach ~40MK/s with my 1050 Ti and ~4MK/s with my i7-4770.
It is due to the fact that I have to compute full address each time and it requires 2 SHA for the checksum and a base58 encoding. For the CPU release, I implemented SSE checksum and I will try to implement SSE Base58 encoding using Barret's reduction (for computing div and mod 58).

DaveF

legendary

Activity: 3500

Merit: 6320

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: DarkStar_ on April 30, 2019, 05:06:29 PM

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 2070 (36x64 cores) Grid(288x128)
1535.880 MK/s (GPU 1470.257 MK/s)

Anything else?

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (9x128 cores) Grid(72x128)
321.929 MK/s (GPU 321.929 MK/s)

I updated my original post.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.50823897

I am going to do my best to keep it updated as more info comes in.
As I add cards I will post the date added so there will be some form of tracking.

-Dave

DarkStar_

legendary

Activity: 2772

Merit: 3284

Quote from: DaveF on April 29, 2019, 09:27:50 AM

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce RTX 2070 (36x64 cores) Grid(288x128)
1535.880 MK/s (GPU 1470.257 MK/s)

Anything else?

GPU: GPU #0 GeForce GTX 1060 3GB (9x128 cores) Grid(72x128)
321.929 MK/s (GPU 321.929 MK/s)

Coinettin

newbie

Activity: 2

Merit: 0

Hi Jean_Luc,

Thank you for your work. It's a huge step for generating vanity addresses. I appreciate it.

Topic: VanitySearch (Yet another address prefix finder) - page 48. (Read 33086 times)