Bitcoin Forum
May 06, 2024, 05:38:09 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Is or was bitaddress affected by this „bug“?  (Read 229 times)
longbtcdev (OP)
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 6


View Profile
June 09, 2019, 09:01:18 PM
Merited by OmegaStarScream (2), ABCbits (1)
 #1

https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org/msg06929.html

Is bitaddress affected by this?

The founder of segwitaddress said bitaddress still uses jsbn so it is affected?

Thanks in advance for the answer
1715017089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715017089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715017089
Reply with quote  #2

1715017089
Report to moderator
1715017089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715017089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715017089
Reply with quote  #2

1715017089
Report to moderator
"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1715017089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715017089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715017089
Reply with quote  #2

1715017089
Report to moderator
1715017089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715017089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715017089
Reply with quote  #2

1715017089
Report to moderator
1715017089
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1715017089

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1715017089
Reply with quote  #2

1715017089
Report to moderator
OmegaStarScream
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3472
Merit: 6125



View Profile
June 10, 2019, 11:05:06 AM
 #2

I'm not an expert, but if the condition is simply using secureRandom then Bitaddress does use it and the repository hasn't been updated since 2016.

█▀▀▀











█▄▄▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
e
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████████████
████████████▄███
██▐███████▄█████▀
█████████▄████▀
███▐████▄███▀
████▐██████▀
█████▀█████
███████████▄
████████████▄
██▄█████▀█████▄
▄█████████▀█████▀
███████████▀██▀
████▀█████████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
c.h.
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀▀▀█











▄▄▄█
▄██████▄▄▄
█████████████▄▄
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███░░█████████
███▌▐█████████
█████████████
███████████▀
██████████▀
████████▀
▀██▀▀
ABCbits
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2870
Merit: 7476


Crypto Swap Exchange


View Profile
June 10, 2019, 04:19:37 PM
Merited by OmegaStarScream (2)
 #3

I'm not sure, but  :
1. The email stated RC4 ("arcfour random") is one of the problem
2. securerandom.js on BitAddress source code use RC4. https://github.com/pointbiz/bitaddress.org/blob/72aefc03e0d150c52780294927d95262b711f602/src/securerandom.js#L58

I'm not an expert, but if the condition is simply using secureRandom then Bitaddress does use it and the repository hasn't been updated since 2016.

The email clearly stated that depends on variations of SecureRandom()

There are a substantial number of variations of this SecureRandom() class in various pieces of software, some with bugs fixed, some with additional bugs added.

█▀▀▀











█▄▄▄
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
e
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
█████████████
████████████▄███
██▐███████▄█████▀
█████████▄████▀
███▐████▄███▀
████▐██████▀
█████▀█████
███████████▄
████████████▄
██▄█████▀█████▄
▄█████████▀█████▀
███████████▀██▀
████▀█████████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
c.h.
▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀▀▀█











▄▄▄█
▄██████▄▄▄
█████████████▄▄
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███████████████
███░░█████████
███▌▐█████████
█████████████
███████████▀
██████████▀
████████▀
▀██▀▀
longbtcdev (OP)
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 6


View Profile
June 10, 2019, 04:42:09 PM
 #4

Thanks for the answers, I found some articels saying that this was an old issue and only pre 2013-2015 generated adresses are affected by this....

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/old-javascript-crypto-flaw-puts-bitcoin-funds-at-risk/
https://www.google.ch/amp/s/www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2018/04/12/javascript_crypto_library_fingered_for_weak_wallets/

But im still not sure about it, very hard to find a clear answer about this :/
longbtcdev (OP)
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 80
Merit: 6


View Profile
June 10, 2019, 04:57:05 PM
 #5

Thanks for the answers, I found some articels saying that this was an old issue and only pre 2013-2015 generated adresses are affected by this....

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/old-javascript-crypto-flaw-puts-bitcoin-funds-at-risk/
https://www.google.ch/amp/s/www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2018/04/12/javascript_crypto_library_fingered_for_weak_wallets/

But im still not sure about it, very hard to find a clear answer about this :/

+ someone on twitter said bitaddress uses its own secure random

Source: https://mobile.twitter.com/robep00/status/984008260025028609
aplistir
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 197



View Profile
June 10, 2019, 05:28:25 PM
 #6

bitaddress also collects mouse movements and/or inputted random text to add to the randomness, so it is not completely dependent on any possibly faulty RNG.

Now it feels good that they have added that bit of extra security.

My Address: 121f7zb2U4g9iM4MiJTDhEzqeZGHzq5wLh
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!