This asshole published my private key!

[jonald_fyookball]

How did you calculated that? The minimum security a spent bitcoin address gives you is 128 bits, how did you get to 80 bits?

A quantum computer can crack those 128 bits within few secs, so we don't count them. 160 bits require 2^80 invocations of RIPEMD-160.

I don't think is correct.  First there is no quantum computer in existence thats capable of running Shor's algorithm.
Second, I'm pretty sure the 160 bits of security is from only 1 or 2 rounds of the RIPEMD-160 hash.

True , i also dont believe in quantum theory that much.

No it's 160 bits in total, please join the entropy discussion here and share your thoughts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1523431.0

So is the RIPEMD160 more secure than SHA256, is more quantum resistant?

Isnt that 32 bits = 160 -128 = 32. If it can crack the SHA256 layer in few secs, than all is left is 32 bits.

SHA256 is more secure (128 bits vs 80 bits).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover%27s_algorithm

How long would it take to crack 80 bits? Would the devs have time to swap the ECDSA into something resistant or would all bitcoin become drained instantly?

You seem a bit confused.   

There are no known quantum algorithms that can crack a hash function.  ECDSA has 128 bits of security
but if it was somehow completely cracked, spent addresses would have no security and unspent still
have 160 from RIPEMD-160.  You don't subtract one from the other, it doesnt work that way.

[RealBitcoin]

You seem a bit confused.   

There are no known quantum algorithms that can crack a hash function.  ECDSA has 128 bits of security
but if it was somehow completely cracked, spent addresses would have no security and unspent still
have 160 from RIPEMD-160.  You don't subtract one from the other, it doesnt work that way.

Yes you are right, i confused always the choice element of the user. Of course you either have 128 or 160, you cannot have a middleground .

But I also dont believe in quantum theory, i think its bollocks , it is just overcomplicated shit, that can probably be explained simply but the cognitive dissonance of scientists and their addiction to complicated formulas is stunning.

It's the keynesianism of physics, and we know that for certain that it doesnt work, however physics is more theoretical than practical so it might take a while for scientists to find the real answers.

[franky1]

ok to clear the matter up..

the PRIVATE KEY is 256bit.. (32 bytes)
but when converting to a PUBLIC KEY... it is the PUBLIC KEY that has less bits/bytes

[Jhanzo]

A noobish question just popped up in my brain.  How large will that website be if it have at least half of the number of possible private keys plus addresses?  Let's exclude the blockchain links for now.

[RealBitcoin]

A noobish question just popped up in my brain.  How large will that website be if it have at least half of the number of possible private keys plus addresses?  Let's exclude the blockchain links for now.

It doesnt store anything. It just calculates every page when you load it.

It doesnt have all the private keys because it's impossible to calculate them all until the solar system collapses.

[franky1]

A noobish question just popped up in my brain.  How large will that website be if it have at least half of the number of possible private keys plus addresses?  Let's exclude the blockchain links for now.

well put it this way. the website does not save the keys. it just calculates it as a user clicks a page.. but if it were to store all private keys

there are
115792089237316195423570985008687907852837564279074904382605163141518161494336 different combinations.. (go to final page and hover over the bottom privkey to see)
multiply it by 32byte per key and then you will know how many bytes of storage is required just to store the private keys

in short its(laymans basic rounded maths)
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000bytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000kilobytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000megabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,gigabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000terrabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000petabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000exobytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000zetabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000yotabytes

[RealBitcoin]

A noobish question just popped up in my brain.  How large will that website be if it have at least half of the number of possible private keys plus addresses?  Let's exclude the blockchain links for now.

well put it this way. the website does not save the keys. it just calculates it as a user clicks a page.. but if it were to store all private keys

there are
115792089237316195423570985008687907852837564279074904382605163141518161494336
different combinations.. multiply it by 32byte per key and then you will know how many bytes of storage is required just to store the private keys

in short its(laymans basic rounded maths)
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000bytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000kilobytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000megabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,gigabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000terrabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000petabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000exobytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000zetabytes
3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000yotabytes

I can store that on a floppy, no problem.

Its 904625697166532776746648320380374280100293470930272690489102837043110636675  pages x 128 items on a page =1.15792089*10^77 = 256 bit security exactly

[franky1]

I can store that on a floppy, no problem.

Its 904625697166532776746648320380374280100293470930272690489102837043110636675  pages x 128 items =1.15792089*10^77 = 256 bit security

lol yea
i think the question was if they had to store every private key.. rather than just the formulae that can make it "on the fly"
we both know the website only stores the formulae to create it on the fly but i have done the theoretical (because i rounded) sums of data storage needed if every private key was saved individually, just for fun

[Jhanzo]

I can store that on a floppy, no problem.

Its 904625697166532776746648320380374280100293470930272690489102837043110636675  pages x 128 items =1.15792089*10^77 = 256 bit security

lol yea
i think the question was if they had to store every private key.. rather than just the formulae that can make it "on the fly"
we both know the website only stores the formulae to create it on the fly but i have done the theoretical (because i rounded) sums of data storage needed if every private key was saved individually, just for fun

Oh, I see.  I know that it is not storing all private keys but I had thought that the private keys are stored in specific page once they are generated randomly (because someone picked that page).  Guess they're not so random after all, then?

[RealBitcoin]

Oh, I see.  I know that it is not storing all private keys but I had thought that the private keys are stored in specific page once they are generated randomly (because someone picked that page).

Why would they store it after you seen it, it would be a waste of space, all addresses that you generate there will be empty.

The probability of finding an address with balance on it, is close to 0.

 Guess they're not so random after all, then?

What do you mean? You choose the page you visit.

But when the wallet generates the private key for you, it's probably somewhere higher, and not in the first pages.

[RawDog]

The probability of finding an address with balance on it, is close to 0.

So, you are saying that there is some probability, and the probability is nonzero?

Why would they store it after you seen it, it would be a waste of space

Not really.  That space would be: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000

if you don't store the key, and

0101101010110110101001000101101010101010101011010110010111010101010101011101010 1010101011001010101101010110110101001000101101010101010101011010110010111010101 0101010111010101010101011001010101101010110110101001000101101010101010101011010 1100101110101010101010111010101010101011001010101101010110110101001000101101010 101010101011010110010111010101010101011101010101010101100101

The space isn't wasted at all.  Either you put a '1' in there or a '0' in there.  Changing it from all zero to a mix of 1 and 0 doesn't 'waste' space.  If the space exists, it doesn't care if it is a 1 or a 0.  

3,705,346,855,594,110,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000terrabytes

And I was thinking those new 5 terabyte harddrives are getting pretty cheap.  I might fill a few of them with keys just for the hell of it.  

[Come-from-Beyond]

How did you calculated that? The minimum security a spent bitcoin address gives you is 128 bits, how did you get to 80 bits?

A quantum computer can crack those 128 bits within few secs, so we don't count them. 160 bits require 2^80 invocations of RIPEMD-160.

I don't think is correct.  First there is no quantum computer in existence thats capable of running Shor's algorithm.
Second, I'm pretty sure the 160 bits of security is from only 1 or 2 rounds of the RIPEMD-160 hash.

True , i also dont believe in quantum theory that much.

No it's 160 bits in total, please join the entropy discussion here and share your thoughts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1523431.0

So is the RIPEMD160 more secure than SHA256, is more quantum resistant?

Isnt that 32 bits = 160 -128 = 32. If it can crack the SHA256 layer in few secs, than all is left is 32 bits.

SHA256 is more secure (128 bits vs 80 bits).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover%27s_algorithm

How long would it take to crack 80 bits? Would the devs have time to swap the ECDSA into something resistant or would all bitcoin become drained instantly?

You seem a bit confused.   

There are no known quantum algorithms that can crack a hash function.  ECDSA has 128 bits of security
but if it was somehow completely cracked, spent addresses would have no security and unspent still
have 160 from RIPEMD-160.  You don't subtract one from the other, it doesnt work that way.

Grover's algo is that algorithm that can crack a hash function. Number of rounds doesn't matter, you can use millions of them.

[Kakmakr]

Oi, Is this joker still around? It is sad to see someone putting so much time and energy into debunking Bitcoin and after all of these years it is still standing. ^LoL^ Many people have predicted the impending death of Bitcoin over the years and we still doing our thing. ^HaH^

Only the most gulllible noobs will fall for this glue smoker. ^smile^

[RawDog]

Only the most gulllible noobs will fall for this glue smoker. ^smile^

Read the thread, there are tons of 'gullible noobs'.

[patronis]

This is a pretty cool way of illustrating how improbable it is that someone guesses a funded Bitcoin address. The troll is real with this one!

[RawDog]

This is a pretty cool way of illustrating how improbable it is that someone guesses a funded Bitcoin address. The troll is real with this one!

What!? Somebody gets it?  I thought we only had morons here.

[bitcoineverything]

I do not think this is real. If it is, I still do not worry because I use Bitcoin wallets that use multiple signatures when signing in.

[bitcoineverything]

This is a pretty cool way of illustrating how improbable it is that someone guesses a funded Bitcoin address. The troll is real with this one!

What!? Somebody gets it?  I thought we only had morons here.

Wait? I think everyone in here is joking or being sarcastic.
Didn't people read this news few years ago : Directory.io Prank Proves Bitcoin Protocol's Strength

Thanks for sharing the link. This will at least everyone here. It is coindesk saying it is a prank.

[quentincole32]

I do not think this is real. If it is, I still do not worry because I use Bitcoin wallets that use multiple signatures when signing in.

i think so,this is not true or might people try to scary us with some directory that contain so many address and private key,i try to open some adress andi can't found any transaction,did you found any address that contain balance or transactions?

[vlom]

oh NO. this website is really dangerous.

Q: Should I search by private key?
A: No. I log and steal everything.

dont trust him!