I wish bitcoin was based on finding SHA-1 collisions. We’d migrate of SHA-1 much much faster.
-
-
Replying to @indutny
I don't know it would, I see no efforts considering moving off k1 despite it's known issues.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Which known issues?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BRIAN_____ @indutny
I'm referring to https://safecurves.cr.yp.to related analysis; not suggesting it's urgent but migration takes time.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's easy to come to misleading conclusions by reading that website. :)
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @BRIAN_____ @rmhrisk
I think that website does pretty good job at advertising curve25519
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @indutny @BRIAN_____
lol, yes it does there is a clear bias but the points are valid.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
again, not suggesting the sky is falling but today a migration to any other alg would be monumental effort.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rmhrisk @BRIAN_____
what is exact concern about k1, though?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
secp256k1 is only used in public signatures in Bitcoin now, with a low number of signatures/second, right?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Assuming those conditions, one could make an argument that secp256k1 is as safe or even safer than Ed25519.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.