1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
|
Return-Path: <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6369CE75
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:46:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-lb0-f179.google.com (mail-lb0-f179.google.com
[209.85.217.179])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE0BD171
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:46:54 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lb0-f179.google.com with SMTP id sv6so219119198lbb.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 08 Jan 2016 07:46:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=gBCqCGW7Xyw8WdNEjpoPEXEmE8eAI8sYWX62sYvuSoU=;
b=yhH3FqjSd3J25K0tCqChtDByjnCOCWyMuLjUGmJZuDS7XzMbYe2EOtvVHWd8wtTGo5
e6yeGcOVFB24RDb3ItULkn0J5wdw0TjpPdvKkvrUh5+HEwm/bAq3ZFBPq2WjuG8TpUyq
SHyrHX8RJEurnxHeV9WcW9mH5bt5ueY5m/pp1jINBBMMwFiKif+Y1IVmVf/94r/7soH7
rfo/XqeQBlkM4S+GLe0ruIsKURX1ovDqB0/9g6dD1cBUv6hxIIuijF2vN+tN35EgHUj+
hh9mAt1CQxeSvP7L8s3+YuBQxYFsy+DbcUfsTXSGD2EM/tkaYZJtO+XEBqDqw57IBcNi
rYlA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.157.69 with SMTP id wk5mr40763561lbb.74.1452268013312;
Fri, 08 Jan 2016 07:46:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.25.25.78 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 07:46:53 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20160108153329.GA15731@sapphire.erisian.com.au>
References: <CABsx9T3aTme2EQATamGGzeqNqJkUcPGa=0LVidJSRYNznM-myQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAPg+sBhH0MODjjp8Avx+Fy_UGqzMjUq_jn3vT3oH=u3711tsSA@mail.gmail.com>
<8760z4rbng.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
<C4B5B9F1-9C53-45BC-9B30-F572C78096E3@mattcorallo.com>
<8737u8qnye.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
<CABsx9T1gmz=sr_sEEuy8BQU6SXdmi58O30rzRWNW=0Ej98fi4A@mail.gmail.com>
<20160108153329.GA15731@sapphire.erisian.com.au>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 10:46:53 -0500
Message-ID: <CABsx9T3MfndREm9icE-TUF58zsRZ5YsBMvUAMy4E-MmYWxWV=A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2abd60d671b0528d47fe5
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 17:39:52 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Time to worry about 80-bit collision attacks or
not?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 15:46:55 -0000
--001a11c2abd60d671b0528d47fe5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Thanks, Anthony, that works!
So...
How many years until we think a 2^84 attack where the work is an ECDSA
private->public key derivation will take a reasonable amount of time?
And Ethan or Anthony: can you think of a similar attack scheme if you
assume we had switched to Schnorr 2-of-2 signatures by then?
And to everybody who might not be reading this closely: All of the above
is discussing collision attacks; none of it is relevant in the normal case
where your wallet generates the scriptPubKey.
--
--
Gavin Andresen
--001a11c2abd60d671b0528d47fe5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">Thanks, Anthony, that works!<div><br></div><div>So...</div=
><div><br></div><div>How many years until we think a 2^84 attack where the =
work is an ECDSA private->public key derivation will take a reasonable a=
mount of time?<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_=
extra">And Ethan or Anthony: =C2=A0can you think of a similar attack scheme=
if you assume we had switched to Schnorr 2-of-2 signatures by then?</div><=
div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><d=
iv class=3D"gmail_extra">And to everybody who might not be reading this clo=
sely: =C2=A0All of the above is discussing collision attacks; none of it is=
relevant in the normal case where your wallet generates the scriptPubKey.<=
/div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br cl=
ear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail_signature">--<br>Gavi=
n Andresen<br></div>
</div></div></div>
--001a11c2abd60d671b0528d47fe5--
|
