Armadillo ECDSA-113

[cjack]

@JMP-JECXZ Fair question, and I understand the concern — finding bugs after days of computing is painful (and expensive).

To be honest, you're touching on a real lesson we learned the hard way. The independent review process was introduced only AFTER WhoCares flagged the Frobenius invariance bug that invalidated all our v1.x DPs. Before that, we were too confident in our own code — that was our mistake, plain and simple. Presumption.
Since then, we've put the entire codebase through 4 independent reviews, with 175/175 mathematical tests passing, 100/100 production DPs verified via independent EC scalar multiplication, and all 6 collision resolution formulas tested with synthetic collisions. So only NOW do we have mathematical certainty that the calculations are correct. We should have done this from day one.
Regarding testing with a known key: we already do exactly that. The solver has a --v964 test mode using the Armadillo v9.64 known secret:

k = 1984557253727814641989266002264698

This was used extensively to verify the entire pipeline end-to-end: GPU walk → DP emission → server collection → collision detection → key recovery → serial generation.
The current system is in code freeze — no changes until the collision is found. The fleet is running at 32.5 G/s with 99.1% efficiency and 58 workers. At this point, it's pure math.
Thanks for your input — it's great to see the community engaged on this!