{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub108dfgewsuqzm6cvllzmxsv0xnn69rrjnyg5pa32a727k89ndh3xqmsr4hp","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub108dfgewsuqzm6cvllzmxsv0xnn69rrjnyg5pa32a727k89ndh3xqmsr4hp","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2016-01-07\n📝 Original message:On Jan 7, 2016 5:22 PM, \"Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev\" \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Pieter Wuille \u003cpieter.wuille at gmail.com\u003e\nwrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Bitcoin does have parts that rely on economic arguments for security or\nprivacy, but can we please stick to using cryptography that is up to par\nfor parts where we can? It's a small constant factor of data, and it\ncategorically removes the worry about security levels.\n\u003e\n\u003e Our message may have crossed in the mod queue:\n\u003e\n\u003e \"So can we quantify the incremental increase in security of\nSHA256(SHA256) over RIPEMD160(SHA256) versus the incremental increase in\nsecurity of having a simpler implementation of segwitness?\"\n\nThere are several clever ways to exploit even chosen prefix collisions\nusing the scripting language. One could search for collisions where one\nmessage is some data and the other is a jump over a critical check.\n\n\u003e\n\u003e I believe the history of computer security is that implementation errors\nand sidechannel attacks are much, much more common than brute-force breaks.\nKEEP IT SIMPLE.\n\nAsk the Iranian nuclear program. Or those brainwallet users.\n\u003e\n\u003e (and a quibble:  \"do a 80-bit search for B and C such that H(A and B) =\nH(B and C)\"  isn't enough, you have to end up with a C public key for which\nyou know the corresponding private key or the attacker just succeeds in\nburning the funds)\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e --\n\u003e --\n\u003e Gavin Andresen\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160107/9bdcb94f/attachment-0001.html\u003e"}