Bitcoin cryptography.

[SpanishSoldier]

The Q about Bitcoin Cryptography is old enough. I would just quote core dev G. Maxwel about it...

I just need one important question answered: why did Satoshi or whoever decide to use this highly vulnerable signature scheme?

LOL. What would you expect to be used instead?

There is nothing "highly vulnerable" here.  The software getting hit are _extremely incompetent_.  Incompetent implementations of cryptosystems are almost universally insecure.

That DSA requires state/randomness is an extra thing to get right and it would be preferable if that weren't so... but there isn't a reasonable alternative than some kind of DSA signature even now-- and certainly not when Bitcoin was created.... nor is one needed, when coupled with competent software; and without competent software you are already doomed.

[funkenstein]

SHA256 cannot be broken at this time

Got it. What are the arguments for this? I guess more research is warranted on my part.

One can never prove something is not broken.  The best evidence that it hasn't been sufficiently broken yet to exploit the mining algorithm is to look at the mining hash rate. 

Of course in the usual crypto fashion, if you did have a way to construct blocks other than brute force (mining) you wouldn't want anyone to know would you, you would just take one "every now and then" to stay under the radar. 

So, we won't ever know for sure this isn't going on. 

With fiat however, we are guaranteed that it is broken and that private money printing is going on.   Proof is everywhere.   

[TippingPoint]

Never forget this