Does more seed words equal better security? - page 5.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: NotATether on June 18, 2021, 11:17:51 AM

Technically yes but then seed phrases would be impossible to remember, a hassle to type, and also impossible to recover if even (say) 2 or 3 words are missing.

This is the real problem indeed. I always check my seed words before funding any address (by entering them again and checking if it produces the same address), and I have made a mistake writing them down once. So checking pays off Wink

The same goes for writing down private keys: you wouldn't be the first to lose coins because of your own handwriting. And the longer the keys, the more likely you are to make a mistake.

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18771

Quote from: NotATether on June 18, 2021, 11:17:51 AM

Also, a seed phrase can't really have 50 words - it must be a multiple of 3.

A seed phrase can have as many or as few words as you like and still generate an HD wallet without any issue. Only if you want it to follow the BIP39 specification, then it must be 12/15/18/21/24 words.

Further, bitcoin private keys have 128 bits of security. Given that, in terms of brute forcing it doesn't matter if your seed phrase has 256 bits of security or 4096 bits of security - it is not the weakest link in the chain.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Technically yes but then seed phrases would be impossible to remember, a hassle to type, and also impossible to recover if even (say) 2 or 3 words are missing. For seed phrases, there must be a balance between security and ease of use. Also, a seed phrase can't really have 50 words - it must be a multiple of 3.

A longer bitcoin address does nothing to improve security. Private keys are already long enough (2^256) that they are astronomically impossible to break using the futuristic hardware you're talking about.

If you want to make your seed phrase more secure, consider practicing backup hygiene - write multiple copies of it down and hide it somewhere, storing it away from locations where theft is likely.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: 20kevin20 on June 18, 2021, 08:34:13 AM

Would Bitcoin be more secure against extremely powerful computing tech with more words in the dictionary list, a larger number of seed words and perhaps a longer BTC address/privkey?

If you extended your seed phrase from 24 to 50 words, it wouldn't make it more secure in a case of a brute force. The attacker would have to either search among 2048²⁴ or 2048⁵⁰ different combinations. But, an attacker wouldn't need to brute force any of the seed phrases above to steal your money; he'd find it less demanding if he went straight by brute forcing 2¹⁶⁰ RIPEMD-160 hashes.

Quoting one of my posts:

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on May 07, 2021, 02:12:28 AM

I'm just adding the numbers decimally:

Code:

2^128 = 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 (12 words)
2^160 = 1461501637330902918203684832716283019655932542976 (RIPEMD-160 hash different combinations)
2^256 = 115792089237316195423570985008687907853269984665640564039457584007913129639936 (24 words)

I believe that the seed system works fine. You shouldn't think about a dictionary list with more words, but rather with bits. A twelve words seed phrase is a 132 bits representation in BIP39. A twenty four words seed phrase is 264 bits representation. I highly doubt if these numbers can be characterized as “weak”. Same for RIPEMD-160 hashes.

20kevin20

legendary

Activity: 1134

Merit: 1599

Would Bitcoin be more secure against extremely powerful computing tech with more words in the dictionary list, a larger number of seed words and perhaps a longer BTC address/privkey? Say a seed had 50 words instead of 12 or 24 and Bitcoin addresses or seeds had at least one more character. Would it be more secure against bruteforcing or high computing power?

Topic: Does more seed words equal better security? - page 5. (Read 1150 times)