Because of the Birthday paradox, you only need 280 addresses (despite there existing 2160 different address combinations) before a collision becomes probable.
Thankfully, that is still an enormous number. At 90 million addresses per 4 hours, it will take about 445 times the age of the universe to reach that number.
It's also irrelevant. Even if anyone - or ...
A very relevant answer can be found here: Is Each Bitcoin Address Unique?
This is a question of the birthday attack on the hashes. Bitcoin addresses (assuming the "normal" style starting with a 1) encode 160 bit hashes, so the output space has a possible 2^160 hashes. Because its a hash function, we assume all outputs have equal probability of being output.
I ran vanitygen -k 1, which will keep creating addresses matching the pattern 1* until stopped, for approximately five seconds and it generated more than 3,000 addresses. No GPU assistance here.
So, do this:
In one Terminal tab, run vanitygen or oclvanitygen:
vanitygen -k -o addrs 1
In another Terminal tab, run this:
watch 'echo "`wc -l addrs | egrep -o ...
The 160-bit hash that is encoded in addresses is uniformly distributed ("truely random" as you call it), but the base58 encoded form is not. Some characters are more likely to occur at the start, for example.
To illustrate, consided the set of all integers between 0 and 1999. Even though each of those numbers is equally likely to be chosen, this is not true ...
You can do this manually using the hex/base58check converter (such as the converter on brainwallet.org)
Remove the starting 1 and convert from base58 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX to hex: 25c7415deb828c49ccb799c452ae17589bca1af2 (make sure result is 24 bytes)
Remove last 4 bytes to get a 20-byte hash:
25c7415deb828c49ccb799c452ae17589bca1af2 -> ...
I'm copying this from deepceleron's post on bitcointalk:
The change happens at a particular address:
prefix difficulty: 77178 1QLa
prefix difficulty: 78362 1QLb
prefix difficulty: 4553521 1QLc
This is a quirk of how the 25-byte (50 digit hexadecimal) Bitcoin
address is converted into Base58 (represented by numbers and letters),
This is due to the "version" byte and the way bitcoin addresses are made with base58.
The procedure is pretty straightforward:
the version byte
the RIPEMD160 of the SHA256 (known as HASH160) of the sec format of the public key (don't worry too much about this part, just know it's 20 bytes long)
the checksum (4 bytes long)
Concatenate these and you have a ...
There are two parts to this.
First is leading 1s. A leading 1 represents a 0 byte i.e. 8 bits. This means that for every additional 1 you prefix your search string with the difficulty increases by 256 (2^8). You can see this easily by checking the difficulty of prefixes 1, 11, 111 etc.
Second is other characters. Here the difficulty changes depending ...
Difficulty tells you how likely it is that vanitygen will be able to find the address pattern you're looking for on the next guess. A value of 2n is twice as difficult (half as likely) than a value of n.
Because the process is completely random, it's impossible to give you a '100%' ETA. We can only estimate that, on average, you will find your key before ...
just in case anyone still looking for an answer: in pattern.c just put the full path to pcre.h (use locate pcre.h to find a path for it; if you don't have the file just install pcre package first). It should compile fine afterwards.
Vanitygen has a regex option, for generating addresses that match an arbitrary regular expression. I think that
vanitygen -r '^1Bit.*Bit$'
Note that it will not be able to estimate the expected time that would be required.
So things turned out to be a little bit different. But now i have a solution, that seems to be workable and adequate.
Original task was to calculate difficult of finding specific vanity address (like vanitygen does).
Difficult is basically
number_of_all_possible_addresses / number_of_addresses_with_vanity_prefix rate.
So, for example if we have only dec ...
To simply generate a new main network address, you can use the official zcash-cli like that:
$ zcash-cli getnewaddress
$ zcash-cli z_getnewaddress
Vanity is a bit tricky, but there is an offline wallet generator ...
Recall that vanitygen allows you to list several patterns and search for addresses that match any of them. It looks to me like for each prefix, we compute the range of hash160 values that, after base58 encoding, would match the desired prefix. (Conveniently, the checksum only affects the end of the address, so we don't have to worry about it.) These ranges ...
Technically, you can simply run the software on all 7 machines and it will have the same expected completion time.
You will have the same mathematical probability of finding an address that matches what you're looking for in both cases.
First, you need to compile OpenSSL from the sources. I assume that you've compiled it as it is described in the Bitmessage Forum. That way, OpenSSL including elliptic curves support is installed in /opt/openssl-version. As for the Heartbleed bug that has recently been published, please use the very latest stable version of OpenSSL.
Following this ...
Vanitygen works like this:
Generate a random 256-bit integer to use as an ECDSA private key
Compute the corresponding public key
Compute the hash of the public key to find the address
Check if it matches the requested pattern (1Mathias in your case)
If yes, halt and output the private key; if no, start over at step 1
Notice that there is no state saved in ...
It's so unlikely to succeed that it is not being offered. One could be tempted to say it's not possible:
Your chances are along the lines of 1 to 2^160. That is 1 to 4.666587*10^172, or very roughly rounded, 1 to 5 followed by 172 zeroes.
To put that in perspective, if you could create a billion addresses per second, the expected time to find a collision ...
If you just need the keys, but not imported into bitciond:
Generate 100M random numbers, each 256-bits long - these are your private keys.*
For each of the numbers execute the curve's ScalarBaseMult - to get X and Y.
The X (and Y) is your public key - you just need to hash and b58 encode it, to turn it into a bitcoin address.
*) You might want to check if ...
"Using vanitygen you might think that you would be able to find the private key for a given address. In practice, this is considered impossible. Given that the difficulty increases exponentially the longer your vanity is, so does the average time required to find that vanity. The example table below shows how an increasingly complex vanity affects the ...
The key point here is that vanitygen is not deterministic - It relies on entropy provided by the system it is running on, which is why running it multiple times with the same pattern will produce different addresses.
As long as the entropy provided by the system used to generate the address is sufficiently random, keys produced by vanity gen are as good as ...
Overall, you have to start with a "1" (unless you're doing alt-coins). Then the first letter is the only one that can be more tricky to generate (some letters from the end of the Base58 alphabet are harder). Also, generating an address with a lot of leading 1s is a lot harder than any other characters due to how addresses are constructed (leading 1s mean ...
Buried in the bitcointalk.org forums I found this answer.
Use the keyconv binary file that is included, with the protected/encrypted key as the only argument:
keyconv [Protected Key Here]
This will spit out the unencrypted private key. It isn't documented anywhere other than this forum post:
If two people running vanitygen 1abcdefg What is the chance that both of the person will get the same public key & private key?
If a billion supercomputers each tried a billion keys per second for a billion years, the odds of a key collision would still be less than one in a billion.
I hope that the answer is less than 0.0000001.
Yes, much less.
Funds are spendable by public keys and addresses contain public key hashes. Vanity addresses are created by hashing lots of public keys until the hash is in an expected range. What you mentioned is an example of a burn address, not a vanity address. Burn addresses are crafted by manually editing the public key hash with a specific the corresponding address ...
Sure, you can do this with CryptoCoinJS.
First download Node.js. Then do the following:
Make a new directory:
Initialize your app:
npm install --save email@example.com
npm install --save firstname.lastname@example.org
Create your js file:
Put the following:
var CoinKey = require('coinkey')
There is no simple algorithm to estimate the difficulty. Doing that requires you to first determine the cardinality of the intersection between the regular language expressed by the input regular expression, and the set of all valid public keys.
Specific answer why 1Bitpoin is easier to generate than 1bitpoin:
The address is a base-58 representation of a 192-bit integer (160-bit hash plus a 32-bit checksum). The largest value you can represent is (2^160-1) with the corresponding checksum: 0xfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffa06820b, or the 34-character address "...