user118892: I came across address like this s-272edf45031dd498e7b3ae89e11ff21b
In the Address with Balance List
Is the '-' a valid character?

user48884: That is not a valid Bitcoin address. It may be an address for an altcoin, although - is not part of the Base58 character set. It may also be a non-standard address encoding.

user5406: No, "-" is neither part of the base58 character set 123456789ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijkmnopqrstuvwxyz used to encode non-segwit addresses, nor the bech32 character set 023456789acdefghjklmnpqrstuvwxyz used for native segwit addresses.
This "address" appears to be Blockchair's representation of a malformed output script that received ₿2,609 in a series of transactions on 2011-10-28.

Bitcoin Talk user genjix explains that the output script 76a90088ac corresponds to a malformed standard P2PKH script which gave the address as 0.
A P2PKH output script 76a914<pkhash>88ac is composed of the following instructions:
OP_DUP (0x76), OP_HASH160 (0xa9), 0x14 (20 in hexadecimal, indicating a 20 byte push), <pubkey hash> (20 bytes), OP_EQUALVERIFY (0x88), OP_CHECKSIG (0xac)

whereas this malformed script uses an OP_0 instead of the pubkey hash:

OP_DUP (0x76), OP_HASH160 (0xa9), OP_0 (0x00), OP_EQUALVERIFY (0x88), OP_CHECKSIG (0xac)

Colloquially, these funds have been burnt by sending them to the address 0, which is of course not a valid address. (Since OP_HASH160 will always produce a 20-byte value, and that will never match 0, OP_EQUALVERIFY will resolve to false for any pubkey and the funds are unspendable.)

118892: <p>I came across address like this <strong>s-272edf45031dd498e7b3ae89e11ff21b</strong></p>
<p>In the <a href="http://addresses.loyce.club/blockchair_bitcoin_addresses_and_balance_LATEST.tsv.gz" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Address with Balance List</a></p>
<p>Is the '-' a valid character?</p>
 48884: <p>That is not a valid Bitcoin address. It may be an address for an altcoin, although <code>-</code> is not part of the Base58 character set. It may also be a non-standard address encoding.</p>
 5406: <p>No, &quot;-&quot; is neither part of the base58 character set <code>123456789ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijkmnopqrstuvwxyz</code> used to encode non-segwit addresses, nor the <a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0173.mediawiki#Bech32" rel="nofollow noreferrer">bech32</a> character set <code>023456789acdefghjklmnpqrstuvwxyz</code> used for native segwit addresses.</p>
<p>This &quot;address&quot; appears to be Blockchair's <a href="https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/address/s-272edf45031dd498e7b3ae89e11ff21b" rel="nofollow noreferrer">representation</a> of a malformed output script that received ₿2,609 in a series of transactions on 2011-10-28.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/FcO3q.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/FcO3q.png" alt="General info for &quot;address&quot; on Blockchair" /></a></p>
<p>Bitcoin Talk user genjix <a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=50206.0" rel="nofollow noreferrer">explains</a> that the output script <code>76a90088ac</code> corresponds to a malformed standard P2PKH script which gave the address as <code>0</code>.</p>
<p>A P2PKH output script <code>76a914&lt;pkhash&gt;88ac</code> is composed of the following instructions:</p>
<pre><code>OP_DUP (0x76), OP_HASH160 (0xa9), 0x14 (20 in hexadecimal, indicating a 20 byte push), &lt;pubkey hash&gt; (20 bytes), OP_EQUALVERIFY (0x88), OP_CHECKSIG (0xac)
</code></pre>
<p>whereas this <a href="https://blockstream.info/tx/111291fcf8ab84803d42ec59cb4eaceadd661185242a1e8f4b7e49b79ecbe5f3?expand" rel="nofollow noreferrer">malformed script</a> uses an <code>OP_0</code> instead of the pubkey hash:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gnod8.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/Gnod8.png" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<pre><code>OP_DUP (0x76), OP_HASH160 (0xa9), OP_0 (0x00), OP_EQUALVERIFY (0x88), OP_CHECKSIG (0xac)
</code></pre>
<p>Colloquially, these funds have been burnt by sending them to the address <code>0</code>, which is of course not a valid address. (Since <code>OP_HASH160</code> will always produce a 20-byte value, and that will never match <code>0</code>, <code>OP_EQUALVERIFY</code> will resolve to <code>false</code> for any pubkey and the funds are unspendable.)</p>
