schnuber (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 96
Merit: 18
|
|
June 29, 2013, 08:11:06 PM |
|
I have a stupid question. How is it prevented that there are accidentally two identical bitcoin addresses in the system? Of course the probability is small but if it happened it would be disastrous, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
|
Remember remember the 5th of November
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1862
Merit: 1011
Reverse engineer from time to time
|
|
June 29, 2013, 08:28:01 PM |
|
I have a stupid question. How is it prevented that there are accidentally two identical bitcoin addresses in the system? Of course the probability is small but if it happened it would be disastrous, wouldn't it?
It wouldn't really be that disastrous. But no, there is no system to prevent two addresses from colliding. If it ever happened, it would mean you can steal the money in there.
|
BTC:1AiCRMxgf1ptVQwx6hDuKMu4f7F27QmJC2
|
|
|
justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
June 29, 2013, 08:29:17 PM |
|
How do you prevent yourself from being simultaneously struck by lightening and a meteorite while also being bitten by a mosquito that gives you West Nile virus as your house is being swallowed by a sinkhole caused by an earthquake?
|
|
|
|
BurtW
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1138
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
|
|
June 29, 2013, 08:52:28 PM |
|
From another thread just yesterday, there are exactly:
p = FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFE FFFFFC2F
= 2^256 − 2^32 − 2^9 − 2^8 − 2^7 − 2^6 − 2^4 − 1
possible key pairs in the Bitcoin system.
However, because of the way Bitcoin addresses are calculated there are "only" 2^160 possible Bitcoin addresses.
So 2^160 is the number you are dealing with when talking about Bitcoin address collisions.
This number is big. Really, really big. The probablity of a collision is so small that it will never happen.
|
Our family was terrorized by Homeland Security. Read all about it here: http://www.jmwagner.com/ and http://www.burtw.com/ Any donations to help us recover from the $300,000 in legal fees and forced donations to the Federal Asset Forfeiture slush fund are greatly appreciated!
|
|
|
grue
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1462
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:03:36 PM |
|
From another thread just yesterday, there are exactly:
p = FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFE FFFFFC2F
= 2^256 − 2^32 − 2^9 − 2^8 − 2^7 − 2^6 − 2^4 − 1
possible key pairs in the Bitcoin system.
However, because of the way Bitcoin addresses are calculated there are "only" 2^160 possible Bitcoin addresses.
So 2^160 is the number you are dealing with when talking about Bitcoin address collisions.
This number is big. Really, really big. The probablity of a collision is so small that it will never happen.
Yep, 2^160 ~ 1.46x10^48 = 48 zeros!
|
|
|
|
jackjack
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1280
May Bitcoin be touched by his Noodly Appendage
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:04:33 PM Last edit: July 12, 2013, 07:43:15 AM by jackjack |
|
Number of water molecules on Earth: 4.68 x 1046 Number of keys possible: 2 ^ 160 = 1.5 x 1048 = 30 * Number of water molecules on Earth
Imagine you choose one water molecule on Earth (anywhere: in ocean, your kitchen, your cat's lung, Kim Jung Il's hair, etc) and I do the same without us communicating The possibility of address collision is 30 times lower than the possibility of us chosing the same water molecule
Even if choose billions of water molecules (which is 1000000000000000 tinier than a glass of water) instead of just one, do you realize how ridiculously impossible it is for us to have even one shared molecule?
|
Own address: 19QkqAza7BHFTuoz9N8UQkryP4E9jHo4N3 - Pywallet support: 1AQDfx22pKGgXnUZFL1e4UKos3QqvRzNh5 - Bitcointalk++ script support: 1Pxeccscj1ygseTdSV1qUqQCanp2B2NMM2 Pywallet: instructions. Encrypted wallet support, export/import keys/addresses, backup wallets, export/import CSV data from/into wallet, merge wallets, delete/import addresses and transactions, recover altcoins sent to bitcoin addresses, sign/verify messages and files with Bitcoin addresses, recover deleted wallets, etc.
|
|
|
schnuber (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 96
Merit: 18
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:09:16 PM |
|
Many commercial entities will use a new address for each transaction. If bitcoin will be widely adopted someday the amount of used bitcoin addresses will be also very big. Of course the probability of two identical addresses will still be very small... but it will be there, nonetheless. I simply wonder what the implications would be if that happened.
|
|
|
|
grue
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1462
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:10:24 PM |
|
Many commercial entities will use a new address for each transaction. If bitcoin will be widely adopted someday the amount of used bitcoin addresses will be also very big. Of course the probability of two identical addresses will still be very small... but it will be there, nonetheless. I simply wonder what the implications would be if that happened.
has been discussed 9001 times. please search for answer kthx
|
|
|
|
threeip
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:12:16 PM |
|
Many commercial entities will use a new address for each transaction. If bitcoin will be widely adopted someday the amount of used bitcoin addresses will be also very big. Of course the probability of two identical addresses will still be very small... but it will be there, nonetheless. I simply wonder what the implications would be if that happened.
Chance would be the address was used 10 years ago by someone, and they've lost the privkey by now anyway. Always a good idea to empty old addresses right?
|
|
|
|
jackjack
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1280
May Bitcoin be touched by his Noodly Appendage
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:14:36 PM |
|
Many commercial entities will use a new address for each transaction. If bitcoin will be widely adopted someday the amount of used bitcoin addresses will be also very big. Of course the probability of two identical addresses will still be very small... but it will be there, nonetheless. I simply wonder what the implications would be if that happened.
Obvious lack of sense of proportion Did you ever wonder about the implications of being hit by 3 lightnings simultaneously on the right eye, the left feet and the belly button? Also, search
|
Own address: 19QkqAza7BHFTuoz9N8UQkryP4E9jHo4N3 - Pywallet support: 1AQDfx22pKGgXnUZFL1e4UKos3QqvRzNh5 - Bitcointalk++ script support: 1Pxeccscj1ygseTdSV1qUqQCanp2B2NMM2 Pywallet: instructions. Encrypted wallet support, export/import keys/addresses, backup wallets, export/import CSV data from/into wallet, merge wallets, delete/import addresses and transactions, recover altcoins sent to bitcoin addresses, sign/verify messages and files with Bitcoin addresses, recover deleted wallets, etc.
|
|
|
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:16:10 PM |
|
Many commercial entities will use a new address for each transaction. If bitcoin will be widely adopted someday the amount of used bitcoin addresses will be also very big. Of course the probability of two identical addresses will still be very small... but it will be there, nonetheless. I simply wonder what the implications would be if that happened.
Nope. Very big and 2^160 big are two different things. It is like saying if we can go to mars (very far away from the earth) in a year then obviously we could just keep going and get to the nearest star "soon" doing the same thing. Maybe this helps: if a billion people, each used a billion new addresses, every second continuously for the next billion years that would be less than 1/460,000,000,000th of 1% of possible addresses in 2^160.
|
|
|
|
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1014
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:18:34 PM |
|
It would be much easier to crack that SHA256 address. The solution to both is to not keep all your coins in one address.
|
Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
|
|
|
kokjo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
You are WRONG!
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:20:45 PM |
|
give up people.
some people just cannot comprehend so big numbers.
|
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves and wiser people so full of doubts." -Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
jackjack
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1280
May Bitcoin be touched by his Noodly Appendage
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:22:45 PM |
|
give up people.
some people just cannot comprehend so big numbers.
I guess so So disappointing
|
Own address: 19QkqAza7BHFTuoz9N8UQkryP4E9jHo4N3 - Pywallet support: 1AQDfx22pKGgXnUZFL1e4UKos3QqvRzNh5 - Bitcointalk++ script support: 1Pxeccscj1ygseTdSV1qUqQCanp2B2NMM2 Pywallet: instructions. Encrypted wallet support, export/import keys/addresses, backup wallets, export/import CSV data from/into wallet, merge wallets, delete/import addresses and transactions, recover altcoins sent to bitcoin addresses, sign/verify messages and files with Bitcoin addresses, recover deleted wallets, etc.
|
|
|
kjj
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1302
Merit: 1026
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:22:56 PM |
|
Hashing takes far less work than generating keypairs, and so far the bitcoin network has done something like 270 hashes in 4.5 years.
|
17Np17BSrpnHCZ2pgtiMNnhjnsWJ2TMqq8 I routinely ignore posters with paid advertising in their sigs. You should too.
|
|
|
kokjo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
You are WRONG!
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:26:01 PM |
|
Hashing takes far less work than generating keypairs, and so far the bitcoin network has done something like 270 hashes in 4.5 years.
noob response: oh, we are already half way.
|
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves and wiser people so full of doubts." -Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
threeip
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:27:56 PM |
|
Hashing takes far less work than generating keypairs, and so far the bitcoin network has done something like 270 hashes in 4.5 years.
noob response: oh, we are already half way. For noobs; 2^70=22 digits 2^140=43 digits
|
|
|
|
schnuber (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 96
Merit: 18
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:45:20 PM |
|
Amazing how one gets bashed and degraded simply because for asking a legitimate question.
I wasn't asserting that the theoretical possibility of two identical addresses is an imminent weakness of bitcoin.
If you read my post carefully you probably recognize that I am simply asking whether there is a mechanism in the software that somehow prevents two identical addresses (meanwhile I found out from your responses that there's not) and secondly, I wonder what the implications would be if there were two identical addresses in the system. To this question you have failed to provide a profound answer yet, since you obviously prefer to bash people than to provide instructive explanations (which of course requires more intelligence and respect for other people that don't share the same level of knowledge yet).
I think this attitude is not beneficial for mainstream adoption of bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
jackjack
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1280
May Bitcoin be touched by his Noodly Appendage
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:56:56 PM |
|
Amazing how one gets bashed and degraded simply because for asking a legitimate question.
I wasn't asserting that the theoretical possibility of two identical addresses is an imminent weakness of bitcoin.
If you read my post carefully you probably recognize that I am simply asking whether there is a mechanism in the software that somehow prevents two identical addresses (meanwhile I found out from your responses that there's not) and secondly, I wonder what the implications would be if there were two identical addresses in the system. To this question you have failed to provide a profound answer yet, since you obviously prefer to bash people than to provide instructive explanations (which of course requires more intelligence and respect for other people that don't share the same level of knowledge yet).
I think this attitude is not beneficial for mainstream adoption of bitcoin.
You were bashed for not using the search function It wouldn't really be that disastrous. But no, there is no system to prevent two addresses from colliding. If it ever happened, it would mean you can steal the money in there.
has been discussed 9001 times. please search for answer kthx
Also, search
|
Own address: 19QkqAza7BHFTuoz9N8UQkryP4E9jHo4N3 - Pywallet support: 1AQDfx22pKGgXnUZFL1e4UKos3QqvRzNh5 - Bitcointalk++ script support: 1Pxeccscj1ygseTdSV1qUqQCanp2B2NMM2 Pywallet: instructions. Encrypted wallet support, export/import keys/addresses, backup wallets, export/import CSV data from/into wallet, merge wallets, delete/import addresses and transactions, recover altcoins sent to bitcoin addresses, sign/verify messages and files with Bitcoin addresses, recover deleted wallets, etc.
|
|
|
edd
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1414
Merit: 1002
|
|
June 29, 2013, 09:58:13 PM |
|
Amazing how one gets bashed and degraded simply because for asking a legitimate question.
I wasn't asserting that the theoretical possibility of two identical addresses is an imminent weakness of bitcoin.
If you read my post carefully you probably recognize that I am simply asking whether there is a mechanism in the software that somehow prevents two identical addresses (meanwhile I found out from your responses that there's not) and secondly, I wonder what the implications would be if there were two identical addresses in the system. To this question you have failed to provide a profound answer yet, since you obviously prefer to bash people than to provide instructive explanations (which of course requires more intelligence and respect for other people that don't share the same level of knowledge yet).
I think this attitude is not beneficial for mainstream adoption of bitcoin.
Your question was answered though it might not have been very obvious. The result of such an astronomically unlikely event would be the same as if you were struck by lightning, hit by a car, and attacked by a great white shark in the middle of the Sahara desert at the same time: it would be (potentially) very bad for you, the victim, it would get a lot of attention and many others would probably worry about the same thing happening to them despite the odds against it while the rest of us and our descendants would happily use bitcoins until the universe ended without ever experiencing anything similar. Hope that satisfies you.
|
Still around.
|
|
|
|