Bitcoin Forum
November 01, 2024, 10:04:02 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Mini private keys  (Read 1447 times)
Cassius (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1031


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2014, 02:08:10 PM
 #1

There's a page here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=103939.0 about generating all-caps private keys for stamping on metal blocks for cold storage (nice idea). A mini private key would be easier, and it would be simple to generate an all-caps mini key. However it would be cryptographically weaker. The question is, how much weaker and would it be weak enough to be a bad idea?
TurboCoin_XTB
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 05, 2014, 02:34:18 PM
 #2

I think it's security is weaker and it doesn't add much.
A QR-code is easy to implement on paper or metal too, so you can use the full length of a private key.
Cassius (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1031


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2014, 02:37:28 PM
 #3

Thanks for replying. The security of a mini private key is not appreciably weaker (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Talk:Mini_private_key_format)
However, it would be weaker with all caps... just not sure how much weaker.
Incidentally, how would you implement a QR code on metal?!
TurboCoin_XTB
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 05, 2014, 02:43:18 PM
 #4

Thanks for replying. The security of a mini private key is not appreciably weaker (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Talk:Mini_private_key_format)
However, it would be weaker with all caps... just not sure how much weaker.
Incidentally, how would you implement a QR code on metal?!

Using a laser.

http://www.clanmedia.com/web/img/engrave2.jpg
DeboraMeeks
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 500


View Profile
January 05, 2014, 04:09:09 PM
 #5

I too think this isn't a good idea,and the security of addresses and bitcoin is more important. also a QR code can be easily put on those metals and with the wide use of smartphones it might be of the same benefit.
TurboCoin_XTB
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 05, 2014, 04:14:15 PM
 #6

I too think this isn't a good idea,and the security of addresses and bitcoin is more important. also a QR code can be easily put on those metals and with the wide use of smartphones it might be of the same benefit.

I agree Smiley
Cassius (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1031


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2014, 04:39:58 PM
 #7

Thanks for the thoughts. Nice lasered QR.
From another friend:
"We're after a complexity of 160 bits and our character set would be 32: 24 letters (no I or O) and 8 numbers (no 1 or 0). Entropy is normally given as [password length] * ([log(number of characters)] / log(2)) so putting in 32 as the number of characters, 160 as the answer and rearranging to put password length on the left of the equality we get [minimum password length] = 160 / (log(32) / log(2)) = 32.  Given the first character of the minikey has to be "S" the key is only really 29 characters long so you're three characters short.  Twisting the equation round again, if you want to exceed 160 bits of entropy with a 29 character key your character set needs to consist of at least 46 characters."

In other words, a 30-char uppercase-only key does have significantly decreased security. A 33-char one does not.
Cassius (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1031


View Profile WWW
January 05, 2014, 05:02:39 PM
 #8

Incidentally, Casascius himself weighs in on this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81838.0
Since there is a 22-character format, the uppercase-only 30-char format is more secure.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!