Would you feel safe with 1 in 60,000,000 chance of collision attack?

shorena

copper member

Activity: 1498

Merit: 1528

No I dont escrow anymore.

Quote from: NorrisK on July 21, 2016, 01:35:08 AM

Quote from: DOGE12321 on July 21, 2016, 12:06:49 AM

Quote from: Alanay on July 20, 2016, 05:15:54 PM

Just a simple question, if the answer is no please tell me the minimum number you'd feel safe at.

EDIT: If no also, would 1 in 2,176,782,336 be enough or still no?

First of all, if you mean a physical collision attack like a car crash, this thread should be in off-topic.

But to answer your question, In in 10 000 000 000 would work well. Wink

1 in 10 000 000 000 would still be cracked insanely fast.. You need big numbers with more than a 100 zeros to get safety from collission.

Luckily, that's exactly what bitcoin provides. And even when you get a collision, the address most likely does not hold any coins.

Nope, even if we assume full 256 bit there are only 78 decimal digits. For an unused (for paying, not receiving) address we can assume 160 bit (due to RIPEMD160) and for a used address 128 bit (due to ECDSA), so 49 and 39 decimal digits respectivly. If you must have 100 decimal digits to feel secure, bitcoin is too weak for you.

helloeverybody

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1000

★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice

Quote from: Kakmakr on July 21, 2016, 01:25:35 AM

I believe in reducing the risk, by spreading my coins over multiple addresses with much smaller amounts. It might increase the risk for having more addresses, but the loss will be significant lower, IF it did happen. Who will have lost more? A person with 1000 bitcoins in one address or a person with 10 bitcoins in 100 Bitcoin addresses? < I would much rather lose small amounts than losing everything in one collision >

But that is just my screwed up logic, and to others this might pose a higher risk. My strategy has worked for 5 years and I have not lost a single Satoshi due to collisions. ^smile^

I follow a similar procedure but its probably pointless to do since a collision is so unlikely . there certainly hasnt been any random collisions so far by just creating a new address and im more than confident that no one has been able to brutefore any up to this point either. 1 in 60000000 could obviously be bruteforced though.

NorrisK

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 1007

Quote from: DOGE12321 on July 21, 2016, 12:06:49 AM

Quote from: Alanay on July 20, 2016, 05:15:54 PM

Just a simple question, if the answer is no please tell me the minimum number you'd feel safe at.

EDIT: If no also, would 1 in 2,176,782,336 be enough or still no?

First of all, if you mean a physical collision attack like a car crash, this thread should be in off-topic.

But to answer your question, In in 10 000 000 000 would work well. Wink

1 in 10 000 000 000 would still be cracked insanely fast.. You need big numbers with more than a 100 zeros to get safety from collission.

Luckily, that's exactly what bitcoin provides. And even when you get a collision, the address most likely does not hold any coins.

Kakmakr

legendary

Activity: 3542

Merit: 1965

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

I believe in reducing the risk, by spreading my coins over multiple addresses with much smaller amounts. It might increase the risk for having more addresses, but the loss will be significant lower, IF it did happen. Who will have lost more? A person with 1000 bitcoins in one address or a person with 10 bitcoins in 100 Bitcoin addresses? < I would much rather lose small amounts than losing everything in one collision >

But that is just my screwed up logic, and to others this might pose a higher risk. My strategy has worked for 5 years and I have not lost a single Satoshi due to collisions. ^smile^

DOGE12321

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

Quote from: Alanay on July 20, 2016, 05:15:54 PM

Just a simple question, if the answer is no please tell me the minimum number you'd feel safe at.

EDIT: If no also, would 1 in 2,176,782,336 be enough or still no?

First of all, if you mean a physical collision attack like a car crash, this thread should be in off-topic.

But to answer your question, In in 10 000 000 000 would work well. Wink

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: odolvlobo on July 20, 2016, 08:53:54 PM

Quote from: Alanay on July 20, 2016, 05:15:54 PM

Just a simple question, if the answer is no please tell me the minimum number you'd feel safe at.

EDIT: If no also, would 1 in 2,176,782,336 be enough or still no?

It isn't clear what you mean by "collision attack". I'm going to assume that you mean the chance of randomly guessing a key would be 1 in 60 million.

You specified the risk, but what about the loss, and the cost of the attack? If the loss is 1 satoshi, then I wouldn't feel safe, but I also wouldn't care.

On the other hand, if the loss is 1 BTC, then no. My laptop can check 60 million addresses in just a few seconds.

To protect 1 BTC, I would feel safe with at least a 1 in 1.5 x 10²⁰ chance, because then it would be more profitable to mine 1 BTC than to steal mine.

I'm pretty sure that the worst iteration of Bitcoin is magnitudes better than the best protected bank account. The scammers running Bitcoin exchanges and businesses make Bitcoin unsafe, not the design.

odolvlobo

legendary

Activity: 4466

Merit: 3391

Quote from: Alanay on July 20, 2016, 05:15:54 PM

Just a simple question, if the answer is no please tell me the minimum number you'd feel safe at.

EDIT: If no also, would 1 in 2,176,782,336 be enough or still no?

It isn't clear what you mean by "collision attack". I'm going to assume that you mean the chance of randomly guessing a key would be 1 in 60 million.

You specified the risk, but what about the loss, and the cost of the attack? If the loss is 1 satoshi, then I wouldn't feel safe, but I also wouldn't care.

On the other hand, if the loss is 1 BTC, then no. My laptop can check 60 million addresses in just a few seconds.

To protect 1 BTC, I would feel safe with at least a 1 in 1.5 x 10²⁰ chance, because then it would be more profitable to mine 1 BTC than to steal mine.

Soros Shorts

donator

Activity: 1617

Merit: 1012

Quote from: Alanay on July 20, 2016, 05:25:13 PM

Quote from: DebitMe on July 20, 2016, 05:17:26 PM

Of course not, 60M possibility would be broken in seconds. I feel safe with SHA256.

How about 1 in 1.0638735892371651e+56?

I think 1 in 1e+109 would be the minimum that I would feel safe with today.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: Alanay on July 20, 2016, 05:38:24 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on July 20, 2016, 05:27:32 PM

Yes

I ride in a car almost every day.

Your odds of dying in a car crash, over the span of your entire life, are somewhere in between 1 and 50 and 1 and 100. When broken down on a per year basis, your odds of dying in a vehicle crash would somewhere in between 1 and 4,000 and 1 and 8,000.

Thank you for saying yes, but it would be extremely vulnerable to brute-force attacks. So I guess it's out of the question.

But which address? Yours? Mine? Random?

The number of addresses increases the odds.

Alanay

full member

Activity: 161

Merit: 100

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on July 20, 2016, 05:27:32 PM

Yes

I ride in a car almost every day.

Your odds of dying in a car crash, over the span of your entire life, are somewhere in between 1 and 50 and 1 and 100. When broken down on a per year basis, your odds of dying in a vehicle crash would somewhere in between 1 and 4,000 and 1 and 8,000.

Thank you for saying yes, but it would be extremely vulnerable to brute-force attacks. So I guess it's out of the question.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Yes

I ride in a car almost every day.

Your odds of dying in a car crash, over the span of your entire life, are somewhere in between 1 and 50 and 1 and 100. When broken down on a per year basis, your odds of dying in a vehicle crash would somewhere in between 1 and 4,000 and 1 and 8,000.

Alanay

full member

Activity: 161

Merit: 100

Quote from: DebitMe on July 20, 2016, 05:17:26 PM

Of course not, 60M possibility would be broken in seconds. I feel safe with SHA256.

How about 1 in 1.0638735892371651e+56?

DebitMe

legendary

Activity: 2800

Merit: 1012

Get Paid Crypto To Walk or Drive

Of course not, 60M possibility would be broken in seconds. I feel safe with SHA256.

Alanay

full member

Activity: 161

Merit: 100

Just a simple question, if the answer is no please tell me the minimum number you'd feel safe at.

EDIT: If no also, would 1 in 2,176,782,336 be enough or still no?

Topic: Would you feel safe with 1 in 60,000,000 chance of collision attack? (Read 646 times)