Is it possible that not all Bitcoin addresses are equally difficult to reverse engineer?
Are "even" numbers less secure than "odd"?
Does a higher percentage of alpha characters (rather than numeric) represent higher security?
Are there portions of an elliptical curve that are computationally more difficult?
etc.
Topic: Has the NSA already broken bitcoin? - page 10. (Read 50498 times)
I know one use that would be totally "end of Bitcoin" horrible:
Take the Bitcoin address, reverse all three hashes and wala you have one of the (on average) 296 possible public keys for that Bitcoin address!!!
OMG, end of the world, etc., etc.
Oh, wait, turns out that is really not all that much of a problem.
Still thinking...
Take the Bitcoin address, reverse all three hashes and wala you have one of the (on average) 296 possible public keys for that Bitcoin address!!!
OMG, end of the world, etc., etc.
Oh, wait, turns out that is really not all that much of a problem.
Still thinking...
Practically speaking, "cracking a hash" would mean being able to find a practical and finite number of possible messages that would generate that hash. From there you can use other identifying characteristics about the message itself to figure out which one is the real message.
And that has what exactly to do with Bitcoin? 
how hard would it be to make a SHA512 or SHA1024 coin
Not very hard, but the blockchain will be bigger.
This would be pretty easy to test. Just get a bunch of friends to start exchanging encrypted messages about bombing an embassy or govt office. If these douche-bags can break it, they'd be on you like white on rice.
Haha, very true. Anyone care to test (not with me
) I'm 100% sure that SHA256 was born broken by the NSA, as well as every other method that they have released, but that's okay. They won't reveal their crack just to mess with Bitcoin, and anyways they have probably already cracked most banking encryption as well.
So, you know...
Since you possess this insight, you should also be able to explain what exactly it means to break a hash function, and what doing so allows an attacker to achieve? Right?So, you know...
Sure. Practically speaking, "cracking a hash" would mean being able to find a practical and finite number of possible messages that would generate that hash. From there you can use other identifying characteristics about the message itself to figure out which one is the real message.
I'm 100% sure that SHA256 was born broken by the NSA, as well as every other method that they have released, but that's okay. They won't reveal their crack just to mess with Bitcoin, and anyways they have probably already cracked most banking encryption as well.
So, you know...
Since you possess this insight, you should also be able to explain what exactly it means to break a hash function, and what doing so allows an attacker to achieve? Right? So, you know...
how hard would it be to make a SHA512 or SHA1024 coin
I'm 100% sure that SHA256 was born broken by the NSA, as well as every other method that they have released, but that's okay. They won't reveal their crack just to mess with Bitcoin, and anyways they have probably already cracked most banking encryption as well.
So, you know...
So, you know...
Because they need to crack banking encryption..? Microsoft, Apple and some embedded systems are in bed with these guys. They have the source. They have root.
They don't need much else.
It will be the end of the world when somebody with an axe to grind gets their coins stolen from the allegedly perfectly secure Bitcoin network and goes to the media about it.
Right, because Bitcoin has only survived until now because the media has been 100% supportive and behind us all the way, 
I'm 100% sure that SHA256 was born broken by the NSA, as well as every other method that they have released, but that's okay. They won't reveal their crack just to mess with Bitcoin, and anyways they have probably already cracked most banking encryption as well.
So, you know...
So, you know...
X is all coins associated with a revealed public key becoming spendable by anybody and impossible to return to their original owners, which would affect primarily early adopters who have never moved their coins and people who reuse addresses.
In addition there would be a window of vulnerability starting at the time when a transaction was broadcast and ending when it accumulated enough confirmations where an attacker who was quick, and well connected in the network, and probably had enough hashing power to orphan a block or two could steal coins.Problems to be sure, but not exactly the end of the world.
It will be the end of the world when somebody with an axe to grind gets their coins stolen from the allegedly perfectly secure Bitcoin network and goes to the media about it.
X is all coins associated with a revealed public key becoming spendable by anybody and impossible to return to their original owners, which would affect primarily early adopters who have never moved their coins and people who reuse addresses.
In addition there would be a window of vulnerability starting at the time when a transaction was broadcast and ending when it accumulated enough confirmations where an attacker who was quick, and well connected in the network, and probably had enough hashing power to orphan a block or two could steal coins.Problems to be sure, but not exactly the end of the world.
I'll accept a description of the exact threat posed by trivial method for breaking ECDSA in terms of how it affects network operation.
Start like this:
"If somebody invents a computationally cheap method of deriving ECDSA private keys from either cyphertext or public keys, the effect on Bitcoin will be: X"
Just explain what X is.
Start like this:
"If somebody invents a computationally cheap method of deriving ECDSA private keys from either cyphertext or public keys, the effect on Bitcoin will be: X"
Just explain what X is.
X is all coins associated with a revealed public key becoming spendable by anybody and impossible to return to their original owners, which would affect primarily early adopters who have never moved their coins and people who reuse addresses.
The point he's making is... related to quantum computing vs bitcoin. Research it ..
Please tell me how quantum annealing can break cryptography.
Hint: it can't
... which is what I was implying ...
I'll accept a description of the exact threat posed by trivial method for breaking ECDSA in terms of how it affects network operation.
Start like this:
"If somebody invents a computationally cheap method of deriving ECDSA private keys from either cyphertext or public keys, the effect on Bitcoin will be: X"
Just explain what X is.
Start like this:
"If somebody invents a computationally cheap method of deriving ECDSA private keys from either cyphertext or public keys, the effect on Bitcoin will be: X"
Just explain what X is.
The point he's making is... related to quantum computing vs bitcoin. Research it ..
Please tell me how quantum annealing can break cryptography.
Hint: it can't
The point he's making is... related to quantum computing vs bitcoin. Research it ..
Guys I think the community need to take it seriously about NSA breaking the encryption.
I will as soon as you can explain in specific terms exactly what the NSA can do to Bitcoin with a quantum computer.That's a great rebuttal. I'm sure the NSA shares all their secrets with him and he's got all the details. Just be patient.
Guys I think the community need to take it seriously about NSA breaking the encryption.
I will as soon as you can explain in specific terms exactly what the NSA can do to Bitcoin with a quantum computer.^-- Lol, this.
Jump to: