Pages:
Author

Topic: How to steal Satoshi's stash? - page 7. (Read 12820 times)

legendary
Activity: 1862
Merit: 1011
Reverse engineer from time to time
March 10, 2014, 01:24:37 PM
#37
Hello!

This is just for educational purposes. We know that Satoshi has an enormous amount of bitcoins and that he has not moved them for a long time. I think we also know the bitcoin addresses containing those bitcoins.

What if someone wanted to steal those bitcoins? They would need both the public key and private key of the address. I know that it would take an enormous amount of time but is this technically doable?

Also, would mining pools be able to push to their clients a script to find those public and private keys? These pools have nowadays an enormous calculation power.
Good luck. If I recall correctly, there are more possible private keys than atoms on earth. If everyone on Earth had a copy of the world's most powerful supercomputer for free, and they were all trying to crack the same address 24/7 with their supercomputer, it would still take too long for anyone who started the process to ever live to see the address be cracked.
Actually, nearly as many atoms in the entire universe if I remember correctly. So earth is just a small number of atoms compared to the priv keys.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
March 10, 2014, 01:20:39 PM
#36
it is easy to assume that in the next few decades, we can easly achieve 10^30 / 10^40 (we've already gone past the point of cracking 2^128 or 128bits in a few seconds) and it will reach eventually 10^70+.

Are you sure?  don't we start to hit the limits of the speed of light and how many atoms thin we can go on a chip, etc...
we can't just keep adding zeros like that... we hit physical limitations

Actually we can thanks to technological breaktrought, In classical computing , moving from Silicon to Graphen will help to keep us in the moor law for the two decades at least, the problem when will reach the point where quantum mechanics effect will start to manifest in terms of die shrink and this is one of the reason we are moving to Quantum computing where todays issue is the opposite
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
March 10, 2014, 01:13:16 PM
#35
it is easy to assume that in the next few decades, we can easly achieve 10^30 / 10^40 (we've already gone past the point of cracking 2^128 or 128bits in a few seconds) and it will reach eventually 10^70+.

Are you sure?  don't we start to hit the limits of the speed of light and how many atoms thin we can go on a chip, etc...
we can't just keep adding zeros like that... we hit physical limitations
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 251
March 10, 2014, 12:59:05 PM
#34
Hello!

This is just for educational purposes. We know that Satoshi has an enormous amount of bitcoins and that he has not moved them for a long time. I think we also know the bitcoin addresses containing those bitcoins.

What if someone wanted to steal those bitcoins? They would need both the public key and private key of the address. I know that it would take an enormous amount of time but is this technically doable?

Also, would mining pools be able to push to their clients a script to find those public and private keys? These pools have nowadays an enormous calculation power.
Good luck. If I recall correctly, there are more possible private keys than atoms on earth. If everyone on Earth had a copy of the world's most powerful supercomputer for free, and they were all trying to crack the same address 24/7 with their supercomputer, it would still take too long for anyone who started the process to ever live to see the address be cracked.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
March 10, 2014, 12:05:13 PM
#33
You (like most people) have difficulty grasping how large 2^256 is (or even 2^128 which is the effective security of 256 bit ECDSA keys).   The 128 bit or 256 bit seems deceptively small.
 

As a math literate person I do gasp how huge 2^256 is.

Nobody credible is saying classical computers could brute force keys in thousands of years..... it would be billions of years using all the energy of our sun.  That also assumes you have a perfect computer.

And I do agree with this as in TODAY, the math is simple, our most powerfull supercomputers calculates in 30sh PFlops that's about 30x10^15 Flops Time in year = 3600x(24x365+6) = 31557600s and 2^256 ~ 1.14x10^77 so it will take to crack it with the usumption that it will require 100Flops per combination = 1.14x10^79/(31557600x30x10^15) =~ 1.20x10^55 years !

BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT! My point is if you consider only classical computing in the last 30 years we've moved from KiloFlops to PentaFlops or 10^15Flops in terms of processing power, it is easy to assume that in the next few decades, we can easly achieve 10^30 / 10^40 (we've already gone past the point of cracking 2^128 or 128bits in a few seconds) and it will reach eventually 10^70+. In the 80/90s people (like you) were claiming 56 bit encryption was impossible to crack, and you know what, it takes like 3s and less to break with our current supercomputers!
And this doesn't take into consideration Alghorithm break trought as I mentioned, even the current classic computer with the proper alghorithms can simulate Quantum computers and have similar results in some areas for example......... Now if you add in the mix Quantum computing which will bring computing to a whole other level as the potentiel from a dozen of Qubit and the impact they have is already being proven.


Quote
None of those (except QC) would do anything more than switching from a teaspoon to a bucket when trying to empty an ocean.  
Wrong as proven above.

Quote
a) The private key isn't random enough (insufficient entropy due to flaw in PRNG)
b) ECDSA is cryptographically weakened/broken.
c) It becomes possible to build a QC with the tens of thousands of qubits necessary to implement Shor's algorithm against a 256 bit ECDSA public key (and public key is known).

It's not limited to this as proven above but :
a = Possible as proven with AES thanks to NSA Middeling
b = Possible
c = it will happen in the next decade or the one folowing, considering we've moved from 4 Qubits to 128 in a very short laps of time heck Dwave just released a 512 Qbits Processor and they claim to have a 1000 Qubits in their lab ready to roll
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/01/10/this-company-sold-google-a-quantum-computer-heres-how-it-works/

Also the Shor Alghorithm is not the most efficient Alghrorithm beyond 600 Qubits in comparaison to Fourier Transform
On one hand factoring and calculation logs and the other the usual linear transform that can be decomposed to I or Unitary Matrix, which Qubits likes.
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
March 10, 2014, 11:41:23 AM
#32
I don't understand how people claims that it will take thousands of year to crack the private key of a wallet. While yes with today computers or even clusters, it will take a thousands of years, I'm pretty sure that in a 20 years from now it will be a matter of days if not hours.

You (like most people) have difficulty grasping how large 2^256 is (or even 2^128 which is the effective security of 256 bit ECDSA keys).   The 128 bit or 256 bit seems deceptively small.   Nobody credible is saying classical computers could brute force keys in thousands of years..... it would be billions of years using all the energy of our sun.  That also assumes you have a perfect computer.

Quote
This without taking into consideration, alghorithms breakthrough or technological ones such as Quantum computing, hybrid system or even on the basic level, moving from Silicon to graphen would have a huge impact!

None of those (except QC) would do anything more than switching from a teaspoon to a bucket when trying to empty an ocean.  

The only way a ECDSA private key will be successfully attacked is:
a) The private key isn't random enough (insufficient entropy due to flaw in PRNG)
b) ECDSA is cryptographically weakened/broken.
c) It becomes possible to build a QC with the tens of thousands of qubits necessary to implement Shor's algorithm against a 256 bit ECDSA public key (and public key is known).

Care to give us a layman's explanation of Shor's algorithm?  Also, I thought the public keys were the same as the bitcoin address?
thanks!
legendary
Activity: 3192
Merit: 1348
March 10, 2014, 11:22:16 AM
#31
Do we actually know where his BTC are?
Its just a guess. What proof do we have that they are his/hers/theirs?
Regardless of that, why would you want to steal his stash.
Satoshi started it, and i'm sure he can finish it if he wanted to.
And anyway, stealing is wrong!
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
March 10, 2014, 11:18:43 AM
#30
I don't understand how people claims that it will take thousands of year to crack the private key of a wallet. While yes with today computers or even clusters, it will take a thousands of years, I'm pretty sure that in a 20 years from now it will be a matter of days if not hours.

You (like most people) have difficulty grasping how large 2^256 is (or even 2^128 which is the effective security of 256 bit ECDSA keys).   The 128 bit or 256 bit seems deceptively small.   Nobody credible is saying classical computers could brute force keys in thousands of years..... it would be billions of years using all the energy of our sun.  That also assumes you have a perfect computer.

Quote
This without taking into consideration, alghorithms breakthrough or technological ones such as Quantum computing, hybrid system or even on the basic level, moving from Silicon to graphen would have a huge impact!

None of those (except QC) would do anything more than switching from a teaspoon to a bucket when trying to empty an ocean.  

The only way a ECDSA private key will be successfully attacked is:
a) The private key isn't random enough (insufficient entropy due to flaw in PRNG)
b) ECDSA is cryptographically weakened/broken.
c) It becomes possible to build a QC with the tens of thousands of qubits necessary to implement Shor's algorithm against a 256 bit ECDSA public key (and public key is known).
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
March 10, 2014, 11:10:16 AM
#29
I don't understand how people claims that it will take thousands of year to crack the private key of a wallet. While yes with today computers or even clusters, it will take a thousands of years, I'm pretty sure that in a 20 years from now it will be a matter of days if not hours.

If we look at our computing power in the 60 and compare to the 80s, the whole computing power in a Saturn V rocket and the lunar module could fit in less than an Apple computer of the time, and if we compare the computing power of the 80s (Cray for example) with late 90s and easly 2000s, the power of supercomputer of the time could be assimilated to the power of a single chip, and between late 90s and nowadays is even more.... well lets put it this way, the faster supercomputer of 2000 in terms FLOPS was IBM ASCI White with it stagering 7.226 TFLOPS !! Well that's less than last year 7990 a Dual slot graphic card that you can set on your personnal desktop.

This without taking into consideration, alghorithms breakthrough or technological ones such as Quantum computing, hybrid system or even on the basic level, moving from Silicon to graphen would have a huge impact!
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
March 10, 2014, 10:53:02 AM
#28
I have an issue with this, why can that picture use a Dyson sphere which is theoretically doable if we have the technology, but it cant be bothered to add in a quantum computer which is being actively worked on right now by governments and corporations?
Quantum computers are not magical, and still must adhere to the physical laws of the universe.  The text explains that their calculation depends on us inventing a computer circuit that can flip a bit using the smallest possible energy. They're not stacking up pentiums here, they're talking silly, near-magical "perfect" devices.  

That isn't exactly true.  As a simplistic answer the way QC work is they aren't "faster" they make the problem shorter/simpler.  So while thermodynamics can't be bypassed, finding a solution will require less "work" than in classical computing.   Still IIRC the larger number which has been factored using QC was something like 117 and it took nine days.  Wake me up when someone can factor 32 bit numbers much less 2048 bit ones.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
March 10, 2014, 10:48:35 AM
#27

Also, would mining pools be able to push to their clients a script to find those public and private keys? These pools have nowadays an enormous calculation power.

They could just fork Bitcoin code and add a rule that coins not moved for XX days/months/years are taken and put back to the pool of minable coins - I've seen some alt-coin proposing this.

Sure and 99.999999999999999999999999999999% of Bitcoin clients would simply see those as invalid blocks.  Miners which mine on that fork will end up with worthless coins and miners which remain on the real Bitcoin network will get more coins.
hero member
Activity: 770
Merit: 504
(っ◔◡◔)っ🍪
March 10, 2014, 10:36:43 AM
#26

Also, would mining pools be able to push to their clients a script to find those public and private keys? These pools have nowadays an enormous calculation power.

They could just fork Bitcoin code and add a rule that coins not moved for XX days/months/years are taken and put back to the pool of minable coins - I've seen some alt-coin proposing this.
hero member
Activity: 1582
Merit: 502
March 10, 2014, 10:01:51 AM
#25
Step one: Find Chuck Norris
Step two: Get Chuck Norris to guess private keys on first try
.
.
.
Profit.

I already asked him and he said he won't do it.
When I asked why he said: Because I am Satoshi!!!!!

 Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 2965
Terminated.
March 10, 2014, 09:47:04 AM
#24
I have an issue with this, why can that picture use a Dyson sphere which is theoretically doable if we have the technology, but it cant be bothered to add in a quantum computer which is being actively worked on right now by governments and corporations?

The picture is of the sun.  It is not known if a quantum computer capable of implementing shor's algorithm on 256 bit ECDSA keys will ever be possible.  Even with a quantum computer if the pubkey is unknown Shor's algorithm can't be used.
It won't.
sr. member
Activity: 299
Merit: 253
March 10, 2014, 09:37:48 AM
#23
I have made a list of possible private keys of Satoshi. I will email them to anyone, just send me a PM.
hero member
Activity: 493
Merit: 500
March 10, 2014, 09:18:58 AM
#22
I have an issue with this, why can that picture use a Dyson sphere which is theoretically doable if we have the technology, but it cant be bothered to add in a quantum computer which is being actively worked on right now by governments and corporations?
Quantum computers are not magical, and still must adhere to the physical laws of the universe.  The text explains that their calculation depends on us inventing a computer circuit that can flip a bit using the smallest possible energy. They're not stacking up pentiums here, they're talking silly, near-magical "perfect" devices. 
legendary
Activity: 980
Merit: 1004
March 10, 2014, 07:41:01 AM
#21
Step one: Find Chuck Norris
Step two: Get Chuck Norris to guess private keys on first try
.
.
.
Profit.
full member
Activity: 156
Merit: 100
March 10, 2014, 04:15:24 AM
#20
Like stealing Satoshi's hoard of coins would be so casual
legendary
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1008
Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political
March 10, 2014, 12:04:58 AM
#19
Pilfer a few nugs from the jar when's in the bathroom?  Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
Litecoin Association Director
March 09, 2014, 11:33:34 PM
#18
I have an issue with this, why can that picture use a Dyson sphere which is theoretically doable if we have the technology, but it cant be bothered to add in a quantum computer which is being actively worked on right now by governments and corporations?

The picture is of the sun.  It is not known if a quantum computer capable of implementing shor's algorithm on 256 bit ECDSA keys will ever be possible.  Even with a quantum computer if the pubkey is unknown Shor's algorithm can't be used.

I thought it was a Schrodinger cat if that case happened bitcoin is and is not destroyed


Can I post now? (stupid 360 second rule here.....)


Ahem, only if you look at the coins Wink.
Pages:
Jump to: