From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail•com>
To: Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Time to worry about 80-bit collision attacks or not?
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 16:06:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABsx9T0JX41bOQxjPg7QFUKGEwgFaCGFzR3ySbaqFwy4i28Hbg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGLBAhczEceqDp6XPSVLJ0FuTcmZgYkVnUE4rspb3JdeHnZJUg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 761 bytes --]
Maybe I'm asking this question on the wrong mailing list:
Matt/Adam: do you have some reason to think that RIPEMD160 will be broken
before SHA256?
And do you have some reason to think that they will be so broken that the
nested hash construction RIPEMD160(SHA256()) will be vulnerable?
Adam: re: "where to stop" : I'm suggesting we stop exactly at the current
status quo, where we use RIPEMD160 for P2SH and P2PKH.
Ethan: your algorithm will find two arbitrary values that collide. That
isn't useful as an attack in the context we're talking about here (both of
those values will be useless as coin destinations with overwhelming
probability).
Dave: you described a first preimage attack, which is 2**160 cpu time and
no storage.
--
--
Gavin Andresen
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1034 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-07 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-07 19:02 Gavin Andresen
2016-01-07 19:13 ` Matt Corallo
2016-01-07 19:19 ` Adam Back
2016-01-07 20:56 ` Dave Scotese
2016-01-07 21:06 ` Gavin Andresen [this message]
2016-01-07 22:56 ` Ethan Heilman
2016-01-07 23:39 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-08 1:26 ` Matt Corallo
2016-01-08 1:54 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-08 17:38 ` Pieter Wuille
2016-01-08 18:41 ` Peter Todd
2016-01-07 20:40 ` Ethan Heilman
2016-01-07 23:52 ` Pieter Wuille
2016-01-08 1:00 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-08 1:27 ` Watson Ladd
2016-01-08 3:30 ` Rusty Russell
2016-01-08 3:41 ` Matt Corallo
2016-01-08 12:02 ` Rusty Russell
2016-01-08 12:38 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-08 14:34 ` Watson Ladd
2016-01-08 15:26 ` Adam Back
2016-01-08 15:33 ` Anthony Towns
2016-01-08 15:46 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-08 15:50 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-08 15:59 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-11 20:32 ` Jorge Timón
2016-01-08 16:06 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-11 3:57 ` Rusty Russell
2016-01-11 6:57 ` Peter Todd
2016-01-11 23:57 ` Tier Nolan
2016-01-12 0:00 ` Tier Nolan
2016-01-12 12:08 ` Gavin Andresen
2016-01-12 23:22 ` Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn
2016-01-08 18:52 ` Peter Todd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CABsx9T0JX41bOQxjPg7QFUKGEwgFaCGFzR3ySbaqFwy4i28Hbg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=gavinandresen@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dscotese@litmocracy$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox