7 ms·
1. Make a SHA1 hash of your document 2. Convert the hash to a BTC address 3. Send 0.0001 BTC to the address you made 4. There you saved yourself $9.99
by verroq 12y ago
1. Make a SHA1 hash of your document
2. Convert the hash to a BTC address
3. Send 0.0001 BTC to the address you made
4. There you saved yourself $9.99
- machrider 12y agoPractically speaking, couldn't I just tweet the SHA1 hash and let Twitter be my trusted timestamp authority? Assuming I don't work for Twitter, it's unlikely I'm able to modify the timestamp on a tweet. (The blockchain has a lot more confidence due to its distributed nature, but in the minds of say, a jury of your peers, I bet it actually appears shadier than Twitter.)
- verroq 12y agoAlso post it on your Facebook, for prosperity.
- deciplex 12y agoAnd, even if that doesn't somehow make you rich, at least you've got it there for posterity, as well :-)
- servowire 12y agoYes, but that would be a centralized solution. When Twitter dies (wont happen, but still) or a rogue admin changes the timestamp, etc. - It requires a trusted party - Twitter - instead of the blockchain.
- zingermc 12y agoFor a more permanent timestamp, just post your hash in a newspaper's classified ads.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- JeremyBanks 12y agoWhat risk does that pose in this scheme?
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- servowire 12y agoWouldn't it be possible to forge the SHA1 or a document?
- tomp 12y agoYou should use Sha256. Then, the answer is "No" to both questions.
- verroq 12y agoHash extension attack yes, but only if you already have a valid hash and document and wish to add more to the end of your document. This however will change the hash. I also meant to type SHA2, but it would make no difference since you can still do length extension with it. In fact, you can do length extension with anything that uses Merkle-Damgard.
- maaku 12y agoThis is a horrible idea. DO NOT DO THIS. You are making the bitcoin network worse if you do.