3 ms·
Like it or not they are technically correct. SHA-256 is a one way compression and furthermore the PoW for bitcoin doesn't require a match for the entire hash.
by powerbutton65 6y ago
Like it or not they are technically correct. SHA-256 is a one way compression and furthermore the PoW for bitcoin doesn't require a match for the entire hash.
There's loads of examples of this in the bitcoin network whenever there's been a fork and eventually orphaned blocks.
- jl2718 6y agoThose are different solutions to the puzzle. Nobody has ever published a sha-256 hash collision. It has happened once with sha-1.
- neolefty 6y agoThe principles are the same — it's just harder to find collisions for larger digest sizes. (Although bugs in sha-1 add an interesting wrinkle to the discussion.) In fact one could argue that encryption without requiring infinite bandwidth or computation requires finite difficulty in math puzzles. So our current approach to encryption is fundamentally vulnerable to (vastly) more powerful adversary computers. Only things like quantum cryptography break free of that limitation, by changing the ground rules.
- jl2718 6y agoAlgorithmic cryptography depends on a computation time approaching infinity for perfect security. Quantum cryptography depends on a data transmission rate approaching zero for perfect security. Either way, perfect security takes forever.