20

Anyone can generate a vanity address of arbitrary length with appropriate tools, it's just a matter of performing enough computations. What is the longest known vanity address anyone has generated?

7 Answers 7

25

It's impossible to say for sure what's a vanity address and what's generated purely at random, but 1CFBdvaiZgZPTZERqnezAtDQJuGHKoHSzg is 34 characters with no digits in it other than the initial '1'. That may well be a vanity address. Then again on average 1 in every 515 34-character addresses you generate won't have any digits in them other than the leading 1, so possibly not.

The address with the longest initial list of lower-case letters is 1yaniraswqyghuJKCRrGwJUA2HakWtRad, and is clearly a vanity address since it appears in the same transaction as many other vanity addresses.

Edit: I just found this one:

1QBDLYTDFHHZAABYSKGKPWKLSXZWCCJQBX

It belongs to etotheipi, author of the Armory Bitcoin Client, and was found using vanitygen, as he said in a bitcointalk forum post:

Yessir! I got a little crazy with vanitygen and succeeded. It should've taken about 70 days of computation time but I got lucky and found it in about a week... (notice no digits either, only uppercase letters).

Unfortunately, it's so cool that people don't even recognize it as a Bitcoin address :)

1
  • My client just generated this address 1NCEERKDRMZD7LbkRYe3FPXDqridjbWxHe which has a 11 caps in the beginning.
    – Jus12
    Mar 21, 2015 at 17:21
8

There's this thread on bitcoin talk:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=90982.0

I personally generated this address: 1BoyishnessfwHq3wSkCkJ7iafUdjhghfU which is the longest one I'm aware of that's not mixed case. It was generated by feeding oclvanitygen a large number of potential prefixes from a large wordlist.

2
  • If you're accepting multiple addresses, isn't that... cheating? In that sense, the bitcoin address 1QBDLYTDFHHZAABYSKGKPWKLSXZWCCJQBX is the longest vanity address generated.
    – Nick ODell
    Jun 4, 2013 at 5:17
  • 4
    Cheating on what rules? The question is too vague; strictly all vanity addresses are the same length.
    – gosuto
    Jul 16, 2014 at 9:44
2

Here's what vanity address I generated:

1DETACHABLEDD7hgExqScWngMrxDGtXwcX

This is the real word. All characters in the pattern are uppercase. The length of the pattern is 11 characters.

1

Here is one we created for our nonprofit. hugpuddle.org it took several months for us to find it. 1HuGpUDDLEhvehXE1P6xeudqAHqKfs1BFM

1

1GEnesisReVC...U2

1GEnesisReVCQG641yERVQgStUvqH6S9U2

➡️ blockchain.info block explorer

On Mac Pro with GPU it was 9 days to have 50% chance of genesisre (not case sensitive)

Was using https://github.com/exploitagency/vanitygen-plus

What I really like about this address:

  • capitalization of GEnesisRe
  • VC suffix
  • memorable U2 ending
  • capitalization right after VC
  • capitalization just before U2

OK, so right now time to raise some money and open a VC fund investing in regenerative communities - independent food, energy, water production and focus on education and new post-scarcity paradigm economy.


EDIT / UPDATE: Out of curiosity tried running the command as if I was to bruteforce it with the exact capitalisation:

Difficulty: 9883693997182075238
[20.44 Mkey/s][total 398458880][Prob 0.0%][50% in 10630.3y] 

With -i (case insensitive):

Difficulty: 18982355007608803
[19.72 Mkey/s][total 230686720][Prob 0.0%][50% in 21.2y] 

Bottom line - got lucky, incredibly lucky.


EDIT / UPDATE:

I wanted to send the minimal transaction (546 Satoshis) and be included in the block but they happened almost instantly, what a chance!

Don't trust, verify. Happy Bitcoin halving! Monday 11th May 2020

Gyf//ybT1XGwV6sOhZf0yCFn1QLmGoD+x/K3x2L+kaqBfKpM8wQb30/8wW3DUT6AQkZUiKIXMfgafQx3cT7e658=

enter image description here

I'm Craig Wright, definitely not a fraud.

0

"Then again on average 1 in every 515 34-character addresses you generate won't have any digits in them other than the leading 1"

I think it's 1 in every 261 34 char BTC addresses. It's because there are only 9 numbers available (0 not base 58 conform): (58/49)³³ = 261.007...

One can create easily long vanity addresses like someone did with this one: 1FuckYouFuckYouFuckYouFuckYouz76RT However, the creator cannot create the priv key so money send to those addresses aren't spendable.

Some other Bitcoin-Vanity addresses:

  • 1LitecoiniwdBzUR84opxNeDggcTxHZwC
  • 1RiPPLESiHh1vAKf2vfZDJfDQJ73UZpNb
  • 1MoNEro159num18KshmWozz7bzW3cZaH5y
  • 1steLLarZSNHpMG2JeJx2LoyDQJHDY6RC
  • 1Zcash1bw9DNTbDkqaB67uYme44eEmtp6
  • 1Dash1Fu4orcgsJKFozDJiDy2b1bub2Qdx
  • 1EtherC5LahniSffzNqKKjT6DNiqcyaTFe

How to explain a newcomer that these are Bitcoin addresses ;-)

-2

Check out this one.

1YouTakeRiskWhenUseBitcoin11cGozM

It is an actual wallet, check in an explorer.

3
  • 3
    A vanity address is a special address that someone can use. To that end, you must generate a multitude of private keys and then check whether the corresponding address matches the pattern you seek. It is much easier to just make up an address and calculate the appropriate checksum which is what likely happened here (it's too long to find otherwise). In that case the user that created the address does not have the corresponding private key. This is called a burn address. I'd only call an address someone can spend from a vanity addresses.
    – Murch
    Jul 17, 2020 at 1:54
  • It's not possible for it to be a spendable address, otherwise the hash used by bitcoin address would be insecure.
    – Chris Chen
    Jul 17, 2020 at 7:57
  • 2
    Unless there is a transaction spending from that address, I doubt it's been properly generated. You can easily generate vanity-like addresses using sites like gobittest.appspot.com/ProofOfBurn , but you won't get the corresponding private key.
    – ThePiachu
    Jul 18, 2020 at 7:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.