It seems people confuse the “public security” aspect of Bitcoin (ledger integrity protected by PoW) with the “private security” aspect of Bitcoin (safe ownership of coins protected by ECDSA). Signatures are only relevant to private security.https://twitter.com/aridavidpaul/status/985536073668456448 …
-
Show this thread
-
Also worth repeating is that the security of ECDSA / public-key cryptography in general is *relative*. It is only secure from the POV of the owner of the private key. By forcefully switching roles cost of attack can be significantly smaller than brute-forcing the key.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
This is also another fundamental issue with PoS: it relies on private security to protect the ledger, a public good. The network is secure so long as the private keys of the large stake holders are secure.
3 replies 4 retweets 18 likesShow this thread
Drastic change of coin ownership, change of staking participation & low rate of staking participation could have serious consequences for PoS protocols. I discussed this at length my PoS part 2 article.https://medium.com/@hugonguyen/proof-of-stake-private-keys-attacks-and-unforgeable-costliness-the-unsung-hero-5caca70b01cb#---0-560 …
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.
