3 ms·
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your point: are you saying my math is off, given the claims of the article (ie, hashes computed, time spent, and compromise
by SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your point: are you saying my math is off, given the claims of the article (ie, hashes computed, time spent, and compromises), or that the article is wrong because it's not that easy to crack?
Google found a SHA-1 collision (160 bit hash, same size but different method) in 9 quintillion hashes (plus some crypto work). The article claims they found a collision against 3 of millions of targets in 3 quadrillion hashes (likely plus some crypto work). Given the birthday paradox, it's not a priori impossible.
Could you explain why you don't believe their attack is mere hash collisions?
- ryan-c 10y agoThey're running a brute force preimage attack against all bitcoin addresses which currently have a balance. The reason they say "collision" is that if they found a key that hadn't been made weak on purpose, it would probably be a different key from the original (bitcoin addresses do not map 1-to-1 with keys).