<p>"My question is, what is the solution to this going to be?" there is no solution. it is by design that collisions can be found. i really think that people who are searching for collisions are using their computing power quite inefficient because the gains are probably very small. so mining would be more profitable.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T09:51:11.140Z
I disagree. Bitcoin still isn't that popular and you don't have that many addresses with balances. Yet over 15 addresses were found in a matter of months. But eventually when it gains more popularity, imagine how many addresses can be found in months time. And what will happen when instead of mining, those with great computation resources start searching for such addresses instead.
VCore
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T08:26:22.337Z
2017-12-28T08:26:22.337Z
anion
<p>The "possible" collisions are part of the decentralisation.</p>

<p>You could also create a currency that asks a server to return a new adress that is not used so far. But that's centralized -> If you take the server down, the currency is dead.</p>

<p>So, the best you can do in the future is making the range of the private keys and/or adresses larger.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T09:28:21.440Z
In case this becomes a serious problem with Bitcoin, can a hard-fork increase the range significantly? And why wasn't a large range used in the first place?
VCore
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T09:38:39.027Z
The range is already humongous, and without fundamental physical breakthroughs impossible to reach collisions.
Pieter Wuille
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T09:48:08.900Z
Did you read the OP? The project already found over 15 addresses that too in a matter of months. So how is this impossible?
VCore
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T10:29:47.167Z
this looks worrisome - https://blockchain.info/address/1LBCPotwPzBvBcTtd7ADGzCWPXXsZE19j6

the guy whose bitcoin is gone must be a sad fellow.
mrtechmaker
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T10:53:05.650Z
@KaranAhuja I don't see that address on the trophies page. Where did you find it? Was it found using the LBC? The following address is the one which had the highest balance (0.54 BTC / 8000 USD) https://blockchain.info/address/1KYUv7nSvXx4642TKeuC2SNdTk326uUpFy
VCore
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T11:18:11.880Z
lbcpot was mentioned somewhere on the site.
they are not only finding private keys but also taking away the coins.

but i guess they will not be able to take more than 4-5 btc before loosing enough in expenses and closing the project itself.
mrtechmaker
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T15:13:53.330Z
The expense is going to be distributed as anyone can pool their resources to find collisions. And I have successfully deployed their client on a Linux server.
VCore
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T08:54:53.570Z
2017-12-28T08:54:53.570Z
hardfork
<p>I had originally posted the following question here:</p>

<p><a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/60734/is-it-possible-to-have-a-cryptocurrency-based-on-email-address">Is it possible to have a cryptocurrency based on email address?</a></p>

<p>And now I have come across <a href="https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/about" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The Large Bitcoin Collider</a></p>

<p>I have read on Bitcoin Stackexchange and other places people writing how improbably it is to collide with an existing address with a balance. Some even wrote its astronomically improbable.</p>

<p>But if you look here you'll see that the LBC in a matter of few months has already found over 15 addresses with balance, of which one contained 0.54 BTC: <a href="https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/trophies" rel="nofollow noreferrer">LBC Trophies</a></p>

<p>Imagine once it starts harnessing more power from users?</p>

<p>Clearly this is a big problem. Right now a Bitcoin address with some balance is akin to a cabin in some woods with no door and a small pouch of gold waiting to be discovered.</p>

<p>My question is, what is the solution to this going to be?</p>

<p>I have a few comments which I'll consider unacceptable. I am listing them and their reasons.</p>

<p>Comment: Even bank account passwords can be cracked and your amount could be stolen.
Invalid: I am not talking about someone trying to specifically attack your bank account with number 123456789 with bank ABC with password wtHMcQ^KB;i9UA6ZPI,VE!r&lt;:3xLkzDlXg.[N0{~214o*/h+(W>O@me?-J_#&amp;|`8. I am talking about attackers randomly going through private keys and checking if they have a balance.</p>

<p>That's it for now.</p>

<p>I am going to look forward to some good solutions.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T08:36:49.760Z
Interesting.
they should also mention their expenses so one can see the economics behind the experiment.
mrtechmaker
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T09:30:46.983Z
Its a distributed effort. You can find statistics here: https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats
VCore
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-12-28T09:48:42.853Z
it maybe worthwhile to double check, what type of "collisions" were found. The pure number doesn't mean anything, unless explained. These collisions were probably "low hanging fruits" (aka meant to be found), and there are well known "keys" with poor numbers or entropy.
pebwindkraft
<address><private-key><attack><hack><key-collision>
Cryptocurrency with addresses that cannot collide?
VCore
# Cryptocurrency with addresses that cannot collide?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-12-28)

I had originally posted the following question here:

[Is it possible to have a cryptocurrency based on email address?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/60734/is-it-possible-to-have-a-cryptocurrency-based-on-email-address)

And now I have come across [The Large Bitcoin Collider](https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/about)

I have read on Bitcoin Stackexchange and other places people writing how improbably it is to collide with an existing address with a balance. Some even wrote its astronomically improbable.

But if you look here you'll see that the LBC in a matter of few months has already found over 15 addresses with balance, of which one contained 0.54 BTC: [LBC Trophies](https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/trophies)

Imagine once it starts harnessing more power from users?

Clearly this is a big problem. Right now a Bitcoin address with some balance is akin to a cabin in some woods with no door and a small pouch of gold waiting to be discovered.

My question is, what is the solution to this going to be?

I have a few comments which I'll consider unacceptable. I am listing them and their reasons.

Comment: Even bank account passwords can be cracked and your amount could be stolen.
Invalid: I am not talking about someone trying to specifically attack your bank account with number 123456789 with bank ABC with password wtHMcQ^KB;i9UA6ZPI,VE!r<:3xLkzDlXg.[N0{~214o\*/h+(W>O@me?-J\_#&|`8. I am talking about attackers randomly going through private keys and checking if they have a balance.

That's it for now.

I am going to look forward to some good solutions.

**Tags:** address, private-key, attack, hack, key-collision

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Interesting. they should also mention their expenses so one can see the economics behind the experiment.  
> **username_0**: Its a distributed effort. You can find statistics here: https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/stats  
> **username_2**: it maybe worthwhile to double check, what type of "collisions" were found. The pure number doesn't mean anything, unless explained. These collisions were probably "low hanging fruits" (aka meant to be found), and there are well known "keys" with poor numbers or entropy.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2017-12-28. Score: 1

"My question is, what is the solution to this going to be?" there is no solution. it is by design that collisions can be found. i really think that people who are searching for collisions are using their computing power quite inefficient because the gains are probably very small. so mining would be more profitable.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I disagree. Bitcoin still isn't that popular and you don't have that many addresses with balances. Yet over 15 addresses were found in a matter of months. But eventually when it gains more popularity, imagine how many addresses can be found in months time. And what will happen when instead of mining, those with great computation resources start searching for such addresses instead.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2017-12-28. Score: 0

The "possible" collisions are part of the decentralisation.

You could also create a currency that asks a server to return a new adress that is not used so far. But that's centralized -> If you take the server down, the currency is dead.

So, the best you can do in the future is making the range of the private keys and/or adresses larger.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: In case this becomes a serious problem with Bitcoin, can a hard-fork increase the range significantly? And why wasn't a large range used in the first place?  
> **username_5**: The range is already humongous, and without fundamental physical breakthroughs impossible to reach collisions.  
> **username_0**: Did you read the OP? The project already found over 15 addresses that too in a matter of months. So how is this impossible?  
> **username_1**: this looks worrisome - https://blockchain.info/address/1LBCPotwPzBvBcTtd7ADGzCWPXXsZE19j6  the guy whose bitcoin is gone must be a sad fellow.  
> **username_0**: @KaranAhuja I don't see that address on the trophies page. Where did you find it? Was it found using the LBC? The following address is the one which had the highest balance (0.54 BTC / 8000 USD) https://blockchain.info/address/1KYUv7nSvXx4642TKeuC2SNdTk326uUpFy  
> **username_1**: lbcpot was mentioned somewhere on the site. they are not only finding private keys but also taking away the coins.  but i guess they will not be able to take more than 4-5 btc before loosing enough in expenses and closing the project itself.  
> **username_0**: The expense is going to be distributed as anyone can pool their resources to find collisions. And I have successfully deployed their client on a Linux server.  

---

