See More CryptosHome

SHA

Safe Haven

Show Trading View Graph

Mentions (24Hr)

0

-100.00% Today

Reddit Posts

Skc Is A Peer-to-peer Version Of Digital Assets Supporting A Consensus Mechanism Based On The Candidate's Skein For Sha3 Hashing. Skc Has A Fast Lock Time, Which Leads To Faster Transaction Times And Uses Flexible And Energy Efficient Hashing.

r/BitcoinSee Post

The Bitcoin Difficult - In-depth explanation with a LOT of PICs.

SHA256 vs Scrypt: How Comparing Hash Rates is Misleading | NKMAG.com

SHA256 vs Scrypt: How Comparing Hash Rates is Misleading | NKNMAG

Winter is Coming for Crypto Mining

r/BitcoinSee Post

Cloud Mining

r/BitcoinSee Post

PoW Consensus Change To Combat Attack

r/BitcoinSee Post

Why Banning Bitcoin Mining Is Nonsense

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Thoughts? An approach to storing seed phrases digitally

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Jim Cramer Talks Smack About Crypto After Watching BitBoy But Bitcoin Bounces & Pumps Above $20,000

r/BitcoinSee Post

Bitcoin Quantum Computing

r/BitcoinSee Post

Bitcoin computes this SHA-256 hash function 200,000,000,000,000,000,000 times EVERY second

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

A simple explanation of what a blockchain is and how mining works.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Today my bank manager told me that crypto is just a scam

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

My theory on why Bitcoin was created by the government as an alternative to cash for criminals to make them feel secure in a cashless society.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Idea: make tokenized hashrate for different algorithms and efficiencies of miners

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Pulsechain Airdrop - Scam or not?

r/CryptoMoonShotsSee Post

Croxyy Ecosysem || A project with a registered company in process in Austria | Low MC x100 potential real utility coming | own Marketplace coming.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Free 15-Hour Course on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency Technologies

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Devcoin, the third altcoin with 11 years of blockchain-based cryptocurrency

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Bitcoin, 13 years old

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

The Third Altcoin Turns 11 Years Old, 10th year of Bitcoin Merge Mining!

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Seed phrase storage

r/BitcoinSee Post

Starting version 2 of a visual expression of SHA-256. These are markers added to try to find the visual timing.

r/BitcoinSee Post

SHA256 Compression Phase ( A rough working on the details.)

r/BitcoinSee Post

My Visual Representation of SHA256 (criticism most welcome)

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Have you ever wondered how mnemonic seed phrases are generated for a crypto wallet?

r/BitcoinSee Post

Did Satoshi "create" anything new for Bitcoin? Or did he simply tie existing things together in the perfect way?

r/BitcoinSee Post

Proof-of-Prowess Consensus; 99.5% Energy Savings with Existing SHA256 Hardware

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

I just transfer my 401k to an exchange. In the next twelve months I’m dollar cost averaging into the cryptocurrency market.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Does the NSA control Bitcoin? - Spoiler - No. - A look into the birth of Bitcoin algorithm, SHA-256.

r/BitcoinSee Post

Think and Answer

r/BitcoinSee Post

Question about the SHA-1 Collision

r/BitcoinSee Post

If an attacker could generate arbitrary SHA-256 collisions, what would happen to Bitcoin?

r/BitcoinSee Post

5 intrinsic values of Bitcoin.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

What attack vectors does a blockchain actually stop?

r/BitcoinSee Post

Is BTC only as good as SHA-256? (Quantum Computing & Post-Quantum Cryptography)

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Is BTC only as good as SHA-256? (Quantum Computing & Post-Quantum Cryptography)

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Is this legit?

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Integer Factorization as proof of Work (PoW).

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Blockchain Basics & Consensus (summary of MIT lecture 2018 by Gary Gensler, lecture 4)

r/CryptoMoonShotsSee Post

$PKT Cash — decentralized layer-1 blockchain project with real utility aspects based on PacketCrypt proof of work — listed on BitMart and Bittrex

r/BitcoinSee Post

two important alerts for users of Bitaddress

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Satoshi has come back to hard-fork Bitcoin to proof-of-stake after quantum scientists break SHA-256 encryption algorithm

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Quantum computer solves Bitcoin's algorithm for the first time in history, BTC drops 20% in minutes

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Crypto Buzz-Word: Sharding. What is it and what are the different ways to shard? (Disclaimer: Long Read)

r/CryptoMarketsSee Post

Anyone got any ideas on hot coins to mine that run on the SHA-246 algorithm?

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

What is your level of knowledge? I made different levels so you can know it

r/BitcoinSee Post

Bitcoin Wallet is Secured by RIPEMD160

r/BitcoinSee Post

13 years after the creation of Bitcoin. Still: 10 Minutes Per Block, Difficulty Adjustment Every 2,016 Blocks, 21 Million, SHA-256, 99.99% Uptime, Never Hacked, Open Source, Decentralized, Immutable, Growing.

r/BitcoinSee Post

Relationship with private keys, public keys and addresses

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Quantum computing will not break cryptocurrencies, it will strengthen them

r/BitcoinSee Post

A Nice Slow Acting Orange Pill

r/CryptoMoonShotsSee Post

BerylBit Blockchain (BRB) | CMC and CG listed

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

A model for a decentralized peer-to-peer web3 crypto-economy.

r/CryptoMoonShotsSee Post

BerylBit Blockchain (BRB) | CMC and CG listed

r/BitcoinSee Post

Step by step to create a bitcoin wallet address

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

How to keep your tokens safe without a hardware wallet! [TUTORIAL]

r/CryptoMoonShotsSee Post

BerylBit Blockchain (BRB) | Low Cap | CMC and CG listed

r/BitcoinSee Post

If SHA256 would get cracked; what would be some of the legal ways for the person to make money off it?

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

How to explain Bitcoin to someone in 12 seconds.

r/BitcoinSee Post

Understanding how a Bitcoin transaction is secure

r/BitcoinSee Post

Weird mining distribution

r/CryptoMarketsSee Post

Blockchain Blog 06 — Cryptography, SHA, and Wallets

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Mutually Assured Protection; how cryptocurrency could change the nature of war to benefit everyone

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Mutually Assured Protection; how Bitcoin could change the nature of war to benefit everyone

r/BitcoinSee Post

What can I learn to make Cryptographic Hash Functions like SHA-1 easy to understand?

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

How to make a provably fair online game using cryptography

r/BitcoinSee Post

22022022 SHA256

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Litecoin, sound decentralized money, is being actively suppressed by Mike Novogratz!

r/BitcoinSee Post

AntMiner in 2009

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Safe Haven (SHA) receives US patent for their Inheriti (Digital Inheritance) solution

r/BitcoinSee Post

Can someone explain this part of Saylor's Bitcoin quote to me?

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Monero Node Over TOR

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Where can I find newly started SHA-256 coin projects for old hardware?

r/BitcoinSee Post

merkelized abstract syntax trees

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

User claiming to be father of cryptocurrency "satoshi" in a conspiracy forum back in 2013

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Penumbra | A truly uncensorable Haveno's fork

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Soon mining on GPU:s will be over! Intel is releasing a blockchain accelerator that will be x1000 faster than GPU:s! Gamechanging tech for crypto!

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

How bad can you fuck up when writing down your seed?

r/BitcoinSee Post

Can someone help me?

r/BitcoinSee Post

Bitcoin v22.0 and Guix; Stronger defense against the "Trusting Trust Attack"

r/BitcoinSee Post

Quantum computers may be able to break Bitcoin! Scientists estimate that quantum systems with 13 million qubits would be sufficient to break the cryptographic algorithm (SHA-256) that secures the Bitcoin blockchain within the space of 24 hours. (techradar)

r/BitcoinSee Post

What is the SHA-256 function in terms of pure mathematical operations? Can you even express it as such?

r/BitcoinSee Post

bitcoin is not safe from hackers.

r/BitcoinSee Post

MythBuster - "Should I start Bitcoin mining?"

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Here is how Ethereum COULD scale without increasing centralisation and without depending on layer two's.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Here is how Bitcoin COULD scale to have 1 Gigabyte big blocks without increasing centralisation and without having to depend on custodial Lightning wallets.

r/BitcoinSee Post

Could the bitcoin blockchain be deadlocked?

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Blockchain, cryptocurrencies, and mining

r/BitcoinSee Post

There is no better way to understand, Bitcoin, than to read Satoshi Nakomoto's - White Paper

r/BitcoinSee Post

Intel To Unveil Bitcoin-mining 'Bonanza Mine' Chip at Upcoming Conference (Updated)

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Bismuth (BIS) - January Update

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

While the market bleeds, let’s learn some crypto terms that everyone should know.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

The thing we should worry about the most is quantum computing.

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

The tech behind every coin by market cap Part 1: BTC

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Mad Viking Games (MVG): A Slightly Biased Overview

r/BitcoinSee Post

Bitcoin mining on quantum computers

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

The Ultimate Guide to Understanding Crypto

r/CryptoCurrencySee Post

Security of BTC from future tech: fusion, quantum computing, etc.?

Mentions

If SHA256 were broken the internet would be broken. Nothing would work at all.

Mentions:#SHA

Yes they did, 2012 article by Vitalik about BTC mining being wasteful. [here](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/business/the-wasted-electricity-objection-to-bitcoin-1330409176) 2013 the name POS was coined, (not the idea) [here](https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/what-proof-of-stake-is-and-why-it-matters-1377531463) > However, there is one SHA256 alternative that is already here, and that essentially does away with the computational waste of proof of work entirely: **proof of stake**

Mentions:#BTC#SHA

If someone figures out how to break SHA256 the world will probably implode!

Mentions:#SHA

Bitcoin SHOULD be treated like risk on asset. History of bitcoin is only 14 years. ATM btc is going through its first true recesion. Bitcoin is starting to be adopted. Bitcoin is on great path. But we don't know if there is some technology that can break SHA256. we don't know how btc community would react, what miners would do. We don't know how profitable it will be to mine in 5 years. We don't know if btc will be able to sustain itself just with fees. We don't know if nation states will declare full on war against btc. Saying anything with certainty is just not methodologically correct. There is so much variables that we are not even aware of! As the saying go, we can't even predict whether a week in advance. If we can't predict something that is purely physical, there is no way we can predict something like path ahead of Bitcoin. And no I'm not trying to FUD. I belive in crypto, in Bitcoin, but just be carefull and mindfull.

Mentions:#ATM#SHA#FUD

The name Satoshi Nakamoto, translated, means Central Intelligence 😂 SHA-256 was created by the NSA. "He's" alive and well. Watching and learning :)

Mentions:#SHA

> SHA256 encrypted SHA256 is not an encryption algorithm Check facts before posting

Mentions:#SHA

“3. Timestamp Server The solution we propose begins with a timestamp server. A timestamp server works by taking a hash of a block of items to be timestamped and widely publishing the hash, such as in a newspaper or Usenet post [2-5]. The timestamp proves that the data must have existed at the time, obviously, in order to get into the hash. Each timestamp includes the previous timestamp in its hash, forming a chain, with each additional timestamp reinforcing the ones before it.” “4. Proof-of-Work To implement a distributed timestamp server on a peer-to-peer basis, we will need to use a proof- of-work system similar to Adam Back's Hashcash [6], rather than newspaper or Usenet posts. The proof-of-work involves scanning for a value that when hashed, such as with SHA-256, the hash begins with a number of zero bits. The average work required is exponential in the number of zero bits required and can be verified by executing a single hash. For our timestamp network, we implement the proof-of-work by incrementing a nonce in the block until a value is found that gives the block's hash the required zero bits. Once the CPU effort has been expended to make it satisfy the proof-of-work, the block cannot be changed without redoing the work. As later blocks are chained after it, the work to change the block would include redoing all the blocks after it.” “To compensate for increasing hardware speed and varying interest in running nodes over time, the proof-of-work difficulty is determined by a moving average targeting an average number of blocks per hour. If they're generated too fast, the difficulty increases.” Here’s a link to the code repositories, if you want a more granular look. https://github.com/bitcoin Hope this helps a little bit. I may have misunderstood the question.

Mentions:#SHA#CPU

People that think that, they don't really understand how big SHA256 is. Watch this https://youtu.be/S9JGmA5_unY

Mentions:#SHA

>The technology is expected to mature over the next 10 years… Yes, but not to the point that it can put a dent in Bitcoin wallets or finding SHA-256 collisions or increasing the hash rate. >It is expected that quantum computer technology will make cryptographic encryption obsolete… This is not true at all. Only certain kinds of cryptography would be made obsolete, and there are other encryption methods that are robust to quantum computers.

Mentions:#SHA

Ok so sell your bitcoin. Put your money in a bank or buy shares. Now when you login to your account, what is your network connection to your bank or share trading account protected with…? That’s right - SHA256 encrypted SSL certificates. Making the threat posed by quantum computing a threat to pretty much every financial system on the planet. The threat - if it ever actually evolves to the point of being a threat at some point in the future - is a threat to everything. The Bitcoin network will upgrade to a new quantum resistant algorithm and new blocks will continue to be produced roughly every 10 minutes until the heat death of the universe…

Mentions:#SHA

We can also switch over to SHA512.

Mentions:#SHA

Buying bitcoin peer to peer is the way to buy bitcoin with cash without providing any of your personal information. You can buy bitcoin from someone that you know that owns bitcoin and is willing to sell you some. You can buy bitcoin from someone that you meet at a Bitcoin meetup that is willing to sell you some. You can buy bitcoin from a bitcoin sellers that advertise on classified ad websites like Craigslist or Gumtree. Or you can use a peer to peer cryptocurrency exchange to easily buy bitcoin directly from a person that is willing to sell other people bitcoin. https://bisq.network, https://learn.robosats.com, https://agoradesk.com, https://localcoinswap.com, https://localcryptos.com and https://hodlhodl.com are some of the peer to peer cryptocurrency exchanges that make it easy to buy bitcoin without providing any of your personal information. Bisq is also open source and decentralized. All six of these peer to peer cryptocurrency exchanges do not require you to provide any of your personal information to buy or sell bitcoin. Some of the bitcoin sellers on these peer to peer cryptocurrency exchanges do require your name or ID because of certain laws or regulations. And some of the bitcoin sellers on these peer to peer cryptocurrency exchanges do not request any of your personal information. You can also mine bitcoin without providing your personal information to anyone. Although, you'll need an SHA256 hashing ASIC to mine bitcoin and you'll need access to cheap electricity if you want it to turn a profit.

Mentions:#SHA

tldr; At the time of writing, only one coin in the top ten crypto assets by market capitalization is a proof-of-work (PoW) token. Six crypto asset networks use PoW consensus mechanisms like SHA256 or Scrypt to verify transactions and mint new coins. Only 12% of the top 50 coins now leverage PoW. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Mentions:#SHA#DYOR

You change the PoW algorithm. ASICs are designed specifically to hash one algorithm and they would be unable to do anything else. If bitcoin is being attacked, you might change the hashing algorithm to anything other than SHA256. This isn't trivial by any means, it's a massive, massive risk to do this. But the alternative of having an abusive miner on the network is worse.

Mentions:#SHA

SHA 256 is less secure than SHA 384 ... but meaninglessly so in the scope of things.

Mentions:#SHA

Yes it is a clone of ltc. Which is a clone of btc. The only real technical difference is scrypt instead of SHA-256 And no, because I'm not software.

Mentions:#SHA

Maybe all of them. If you have a key, you have can compute SHA256(key), which will give you another key. You could keep doing this over and over...

Mentions:#SHA

ASIC Miners can only do one thing: just computing SHA-256 hashes very very fast- But wallets are not secured with that algorithm. Bitcoin uses ECDSA for the private/public keys An ASIC Miner is useless for computing ECDSA keys.

Mentions:#SHA

Plenty of hacks occur in crypto without busting SHA-256.

Mentions:#SHA

They would need to have found a way to break SHA-256. This would also suggest they have access to a universal quantum computer which would also mean they can break the encryption to every website, bank account, etc… They aren’t guilty of any crime however unless they actually do something nefarious. This day is certainly coming however, in the next decade or two and it will break everything and the world will be forced to move to quantum safe encryption, Bitcoin included.

Mentions:#SHA

no and it doesn't. AES is for encrypting/decrypting data for the purpose of information hiding. SHA-256 is a member of the SHA-2 set of hash functions to transform (any-sized) input to a fixed-sized (256 bits) digest.

Mentions:#SHA

Would we be able to use the Advanced encryption standard also known as Rijndael algorithm and how does that compare to SHA-256?

Mentions:#SHA

They'd be better off converting their mining machines to mine BTC. From what I know, they both use SHA256 for the hashing algorithm, so conversion shouldn't be too difficult, right?

Mentions:#BTC#SHA

This image shows just one round of SHA256; it takes 64 rounds to generator a hash. Also Bitcoin uses a hash of a hash; so double the amount of work. Still neat though.

Mentions:#SHA

Yes, but it's not really about the number of zeros. The comment above is a gross simplification. A SHA256 hash is an unfathomably large 256-bit number. In Bitcoin proof-of-work, you're trying to create a block that results in a hash (number) that lower than a specific target number.

Mentions:#SHA

Both collisions and preimages can in theory be found, we just don't know how to do so with reasonable amounts of computational power. And many very smart people, some of whom have broken similar designs in the past, have tried and failed to find collision and/or preimage attacks in SHA256. Ultimately, all practical cryptography's security is based on assumptions, and those assumptions boil down to "people have tried and failed to break it". What I wanted to say was that collisions are \*far\* easier in practice than preimages. Even dated old hash functions like MD5 and SHA1 which are considered "broken" today, are only broken in that collisions for them can be found. If all you care about is preimage security, both are still fine. There are other scenarios (not Bitcoin mining) where collision security of hash functions matters, so standardization bodies want to pick function designs that are resistant to both.

Mentions:#SHA

Fact Before ASICS BTC used Exponentially less electricity than it does now, Fact btc Can be switched from SHA256 to RandomX at anytime, reducing global electricity consumption and defeating the naysayers arguments entirely. I Blame the BTC foundation and community there the ones that refused to act when asics became reality and attacked the network difficulty

Mentions:#BTC#SHA

Quantum resistant algorithms are still in largely theoretical or prototypical states about on par with quantum computing as a whole in terms of development and real world viability. Most of the encryption cryptocurrencies use is simply repurposed encryption algorithms from other fields that are highly dependent on them like traditional finance, cybersecurity, and military applications. Quantum computing hypothetically breaking modern encryption techniques like AES, SHA, and RSA is a serious global issue, not just a cryptocurrency issue. The rest of the world isn't simply sitting on their hands and waiting.

Mentions:#SHA

tldr; Quantum computing has raised concerns about the future of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology in recent years. The SHA-256 cryptographic protocol used for Bitcoin network security is currently unbreakable by today’s computers. However, experts anticipate that within a decade, quantum computing will be able to break existing encryption protocols. Four million Bitcoin, or 25% of all BTC, are vulnerable to an attack by a quantum computer. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*

Mentions:#SHA#BTC#DYOR

In order to remain secure, Bitcoin must, at a minimum, continue to employ 50% of all SHA256 hashpower in existence. If the blockchain were to be "run with significantly less hashrate," then it would be vulnerable to attack by all the *sidelined* hashpower.

Mentions:#SHA

SHA2-512 is extremely secure with the only realistic attacks on it being against less than half of its rounds (<40 rounds out of 80 rounds), giving it a comically huge safety buffer. It is also the most studied/analyzed hash, it is really fast (though not the fastest), and people have become quite comfortable with it over 21 years. Cryptographic primitives are not food, they do not spoil, so once a good one is created, it is going to stick around until something breaks it. At this point it is unlikely, if not impossible, anyone or anything breaks SHA2.

Mentions:#SHA

> the proposed solution where a change of consensus protocol (from SHA256 to something else for instance) would be made to make the attackers ASICs worthless This proposal is a simple "wave-away" for silly hypotheticals, such has "US or China attacking the network with a 51% attack". The suggested attack is ridiculous, and the proposed solution is ridiculous > Wouldn't this destroy the hashing power securing the network by wiping out everyone elses ASICs as well Yes. Also that makes it impossible, because Bitcoin consensus is a supermajority, and mining pools (just a few dozen Bitcoin nodes) are a significant part of the Bitcoin node network, significant enough to block the change > make the Bitcoin network vulnerable to much cheaper attacks Probably not. If this change was on the cards, it would be planned in advance to initially be resistant to attacks. There are many innovative ideas to invent a proof of work system which resists the industrialization effect of ASICs, either temporarily or permanently Even switching to scrypt (used in Litcoin) would prevent a quick followup attack because of the logistical difficulty for an attacker to acquire sufficient devices to attack > Do we have an answer to this kind of attack? We probably do. A design has been proposed, but not developed. It's not likely to be developed because it will never be needed. Someone with the brain power and coding and testing time will probably implement it in a future PoW altcoin

Mentions:#SHA

Sure they do. There are numerous ASIC resistant coins with varying popularity, including Monero. Litecoin's SCRYPT algo was partially chosen for SHA256 ASIC resistance.

Mentions:#SHA

The passphrases are probably insecure - name of first pet, or similar - so it makes little difference whether they're 8 or 16 A passphrase should be long and random. Sixteen characters is not long, and you've provided no information about whether the passphrases are random, so it's safer to assume they're not random Twelve x "awesome" is 128 bits Twenty-four x "bacon" is 256 bits Both are long and random, longer than 90 bits. It is commonly assumed that more bits of entropy is more secure, but there are some potential weaknesses in cryptography where longer keys reveal patterns which can sometimes be exploited to discover mathematical weaknesses. A cautious user will choose the shortest random bitstring or key length which is long enough to resist brute force. This is only a general principle. There's no current reason to believe that 2048 rounds of SHA2-512 is less secure with a 256-bit or 128-bit input The word selections are potentially risky because they have an unusual property - all the same words. BIP39 mnemonics are 132 bits (12 words) or 264 bits (24 words), using 128 bits or 256 bits of random entropy. The last 4 or 8 bits are a checksum derived from one round of SHA2-256 on the entropy bits. Because of this, it's rare for all words to be the same and still have a valid checksum. For example, 128 zero bits gives abandon abandon abandon abandon abandon abandon abandon abandon abandon abandon abandon about Back to the point Because these awesome and bacon examples are among the rare cases where the checksum allows for all words to be the same, they could be standard inclusions in rainbow lists, and insecure for that possibility

Mentions:#SHA#BIP

Is there a BIP to change the SHA256 consensus mechanism? A change like this wouldn’t get the support needed to be implemented. The only reason to alter the consensus mechanism is for quantum resistance and that issue is a while away. Regarding a 51% attack, the time where this is possible has passed. The hash power of the network is around the power of 70 billion laptops. It simply too much power to try and attack. Also, It’s most likely the production of the chips to create attacking ASICs would be noticed by the industry as all foundry’s are running at capacity.

Mentions:#BIP#SHA

>debug.log 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Bitcoin Core version v23.0.0 (release build) 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Qt 5.15.2 (static), plugin=windows (static) 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Static plugins: 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z QWindowsIntegrationPlugin, version 331520 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z QWindowsVistaStylePlugin, version 331520 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Style: windowsvista / QWindowsVistaStyle 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z System: Windows 10 Version 2009, x86\_64-little\_endian-llp64 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Screen: \\\\.\\DISPLAY1 2560x1440, pixel ratio=1.0 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Assuming ancestors of block 000000000000000000052d314a259755ca65944e68df6b12a067ea8f1f5a7091 have valid signatures. 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Setting nMinimumChainWork=00000000000000000000000000000000000000002927cdceccbd5209e81e80db 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Prune configured to target 1907 MiB on disk for block and undo files. 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using the 'x86\_shani(1way,2way)' SHA256 implementation 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using RdSeed as additional entropy source 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using RdRand as an additional entropy source 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z GUI: "registerShutdownBlockReason: Successfully registered: Bitcoin Core didn't yet exit safely…" 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Default data directory C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using data directory C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Config file: C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin\\bitcoin.conf (not found, skipping) 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using at most 125 automatic connections (2048 file descriptors available) 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using 16 MiB out of 32/2 requested for signature cache, able to store 524288 elements 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using 16 MiB out of 32/2 requested for script execution cache, able to store 524288 elements 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Script verification uses 11 additional threads 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z scheduler thread start 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using wallet directory C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin\\wallets 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z init message: Verifying wallet(s)… 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z Using /16 prefix for IP bucketing 2022-09-08T05:52:55Z init message: Loading P2P addresses… 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z Loaded 58493 addresses from peers.dat 108ms 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z init message: Loading banlist… 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z SetNetworkActive: true 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z Cache configuration: 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z \* Using 2.0 MiB for block index database 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z \* Using 8.0 MiB for chain state database 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z \* Using 440.0 MiB for in-memory UTXO set (plus up to 286.1 MiB of unused mempool space) 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z init message: Loading block index… 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z Switching active chainstate to Chainstate \[ibd\] @ height -1 (null) 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z Opening LevelDB in C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin\\blocks\\index 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z Opened LevelDB successfully 2022-09-08T05:52:56Z Using obfuscation key for C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin\\blocks\\index: 0000000000000000 2022-09-08T05:52:58Z LoadBlockIndexDB: last block file = 1661 2022-09-08T05:52:58Z LoadBlockIndexDB: last block file info: CBlockFileInfo(blocks=41, size=51482875, heights=578433...578687, time=2019-05-29...2019-05-31) 2022-09-08T05:52:58Z Checking all blk files are present... 2022-09-08T05:52:58Z LoadBlockIndexDB(): Block files have previously been pruned 2022-09-08T05:52:58Z Opening LevelDB in C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin\\chainstate 2022-09-08T05:53:01Z Fatal LevelDB error: Corruption: 40 missing files; e.g.: C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin\\chainstate/900591.ldb 2022-09-08T05:53:01Z You can use -debug=leveldb to get more complete diagnostic messages 2022-09-08T05:53:01Z Fatal LevelDB error: Corruption: 40 missing files; e.g.: C:\\Users\\ozlav.DESKTOP-PQL90HA\\AppData\\Roaming\\Bitcoin\\chainstate/900591.ldb 2022-09-08T05:53:01Z : Error opening block database. Please restart with -reindex or -reindex-chainstate to recover. 2022-09-08T05:53:02Z init message: Loading block index… 2022-09-08T05:53:02Z should not be overwriting a chainstate 2022-09-08T05:53:02Z Error: Error opening block database 2022-09-08T05:53:05Z Shutdown: In progress... 2022-09-08T05:53:05Z scheduler thread exit 2022-09-08T05:53:05Z Shutdown: done

Mentions:#SHA

>This is not correct. Miners decide which transactions to include in a block. And POW mining pools do as well. In POW BTC, any miner can submit a valid SHA256 hash to have the transaction included and it has to be validated given the longest chain rule. So as long as a single mining pool / miner is willing to include the transaction, it can be included into the blockchain. This is extremely censorship resistant. The same does not apply to POS Eth. Once 2/3 consensus is breached (less under certain circumstances), they can do whatever they want and veto the other stakes. >If you take this position, then you must also take it for Bitcoin mining pools. A large portion of BTC mining pools aren't even located in US and have proven to be highly flexible geographically. China attempted sanctions on mining themselves in the last few years and all that did was move hashrates to other regions.

Mentions:#BTC#SHA

> I mainly read that a "reverse" calculation is impossible Possible in the future, because there is no mathematical proof, and because researchers are always searching for disproof In past decades, people claimed that collisions are impossible with MD5 and SHA1 Mathematically, a trapdoor function for cryptography might be described as having no faster solution than brute force, and therefore key length can be chose to make brute force infeasible. But such a condition does not have a formal proof. Cryptographers work to find mathematical shortcuts, new algorithms which are significantly faster than brute force. Possible techniques are discussed and studied. New hashing algorithms are developed which are not vulnerable to the known techniques, and not vulnerable to possible future techniques On the one hand, we might expect newer algorithms to last longer and longer as they're studied more. This is already the case with SHA2, compared to MD5 and SHA1 On the other hand, we're always only one day away from an unexpected discovery by a brilliant 16-year-old

Mentions:#SHA

If only Horizen could have made use of those gpu miners, alas it’s SHA-256 Algo. Whichever project gets the Eth miners it’s certainly going to be beneficial.

Mentions:#SHA

Impossible unless there is a flaw in SHA256, which seems very unlikely given the amount of scrutiny it’s been given by people a lot smarter than me and you.

Mentions:#SHA

I guess as an addendum, since SHA is a deterministic hashing algorithm, essentially what we're trying to do is seed the algorithm the *least guessable* input, even if that includes actual known data (alongside the nonce). Since a mined hash attempt is something like, ***SHA256(revious hash + block data + nonce) = new hash****,* the previous hash is throwing the whole nonce guessability out the door. If I'm not mistaken, the hash algorithm is supposed to change on-average 50% of the output bits if a single input bit is changed.

Mentions:#SHA

It is of course possible that a way is discovered to "reverse" double-SHA256 more efficiently than brute force or other computational breakthroughs. However, the existence of such an algorithm would imply a complete and utter break of SHA256's security. I think it is very unlikely that such a break is discovered, at least if we're talking about a timescale of up to a few decades perhaps. Longer than that it is extremely hard to foresee what kind of breakthroughs are possible. Just to put things in perspective, older hash functions, like MD5 and SHA1, which are by modern standards definitely broken, would still be completely fine for mining purposes. The attacks that exist against them are collision attacks ("find two distinct inputs that hash to the same value, but it doesn't matter what that hash is"). For mining security, we only care about (partial) preimage attacks ("given a hash (or certain bits of the hash), find an input that hashes to it").

Mentions:#SHA

Shor's algorithm per se is for factoring integers. It is entirely irrelevant for Bitcoin. A variant of it however is applicable to solving the discrete logarithm problem for elliptic curves, which could be used to forge signatures. None of that has anything to do with reversing hash functions though. There is a quantum algorithm that does apply here, namely Grover's algorithm. It's a very generic "find the input to this function such that the output is X" search algorithm in the quantum setting. It's a huge speedup - up to square root, so for SHA256 it would need \~2\^128 steps rather than 2\^256 for a full preimage. However, 2\^128 is still not "instantly", and quite possibly (if sufficiently powerful quantum computers ever appear at all) still practically infeasible.

Mentions:#SHA

The patterns you're looking for do not exist. By design, SHA2 has a random distribution of output results. That's why it is used as a guessing game in Bitcoin mining > hash with x leading zeros That's incorrect. The "begins with a number of zero bits" design from the white paper was never implemented because adjustments can only be powers of 2, which is too coarse The requirement for a miner to win the race is to have a block of transactions which has a header which has a double SHA2-256 hash smaller than the current target The target is actually a range of values, where the range begins with zero. The size of the range is equal to the current value of target The size of the target range determines the average number of guesses required for the entire mining network to win the race The average number of guesses is the size of the SHA2-256 number space ( 2^256 ) divided by the size of the target range > to "mine" btc faster What's the hurry? Mining is specifically designed to create a 10-minute delay between blocks. It doesn't need to go faster

Mentions:#SHA

First of all, if Bitcoin changes to POS or to adjust its issuance rate, it won't be Bitcoin anymore. There will be a hard fork to another crypto currency called let's say BitcoinPOS. The original Bitcoin will still exist with the same attributes as today and the market/people (not to mention all miners and nodes) will decide which chain to invest in and follow. Similar to the blockchain wars with BTC Cash etc... My opinion is that POW is an attribute rather than a liability. The computational effort, or energy consumption required to solve the SHA-256 algorithm ensures the network security, ie energy is tranformed into network security. POS on the other hand is the exact same monetary system we use today. The people with the most money have the most power and make the important decisions. Ethereum's future will only follow their whims. Secondly, it's almost mathematically impossible that Bitcoin's price will stay constant against fiat if governments worldwide continue to print at such a pace. At worst if today's demand in Bitcoin remains constant, Bitcoin's price will follow the rate of inflation, or long term it will follow a similar path to that of the fiat money supply. Which is primarily expanding for the past 50 years. But let's assume, barring any Bitcoin network failure, that the price stays near the 15k range. We all know that all technological hardware is deflationary, like our TVs which always get cheaper. Mining equipment is no different. Will it be enough to make mining profitable? Let's assume not. What will happen then? Miners will keep migrating to greener pastures where energy is cheaper and so on and so forth. In the end, if there is demand for Bitcoin, mining will find its way. And I'm betting there will be demand for Bitcoin. Why? Because of trust. Like I said previously, for the past 13 years, every 10 mins a block of trust is being mined because the network remains unhacked. With this trust, I think adoption is inevitable. On the other hand, when it comes to Ethereum, I have no idea what to trust.

Mentions:#BTC#SHA

No. Hashing involves a large number (64 for SHA256) of iterations (“rounds”) of a basic algorithm, where the output of each round is fed in as the input to the next round. The algorithm used in each round is not “1 to 1” - many different inputs could generate the same output. So if you try to reverse it, even starting from a partial output, on each round you go from one output to many possible inputs. So as you traverse it backwards over multiple rounds, you go from one output to insanely vast numbers of possible inputs that lead to the same hash output. Only a tiny proportion of inputs are valid (matching the header minus the nonce). You would need to find a way to “prune” the tree as you go by avoiding paths that won’t lead to a valid input, but because of the way each round scrambles the data it’s almost certainly impossible to prune the tree.

Mentions:#SHA

If there was a known algorithm for "working backward" from a target SHA256 hash, encryption systems around the world would be scrambling to implement an alternative. They're not, because there isn't.

Mentions:#SHA

It’s a good question. Nakamoto basically answered it: “If SHA-256 became completely broken, I think we could come to some agreement about what the honest block chain was before the trouble started, lock that in and continue from there with a new hash function.”

Mentions:#SHA

AFAIK, SHA256 is quantum resistant already. It's not a function. It's an algorithm, you should look at the code. So you still have to brute force the attack. I think QC's can bring the time down from 30 billion years to something like 15 billion years.

Mentions:#SHA

Actually yes Have good read of [this article from 2014](https://gizmodo.com/mining-bitcoin-with-pencil-and-paper-1640353309) And yes "Doing one round of SHA-256 by hand took me 16 minutes, 45 seconds. At this rate, hashing a full Bitcoin block (128 rounds) [3] would take 1.49 days, for a hash rate of 0.67 hashes per day (although I would probably get faster with practice)" Nowdays, would take much longer

Mentions:#SHA

Safe Haven (SHA)

Mentions:#SHA

> Encrypt the compressed text file 7zip has AES encryption built-in. Choose a strong passphrase > strong encryption like sha-256 Seriously? When did SHA256 become encryption? > favorite song lyrics Don't do that. It's vulnerable to automated dictionary attacks. Decrypt bots use dictionaries built from the entire history of literature, including all song lyrics A passphrase should be long and random, like [Diceware](https://theworld.com/~reinhold/diceware.html) > encrypted USB A flash drive is unreliable, subject to total failure, right when you need to use it > the cloud The cloud provider will lose the file

Mentions:#SHA

Sorry for the long link - Reddit wouldn’t allow a link shortener: https://smallpdf-production-files.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/166c3d9ebb348965b3588f5d983b6e93.pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=ASIA3I33L6ORZPQCODYM%2F20220904%2Feu-west-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20220904T103451Z&X-Amz-Expires=900&X-Amz-Security-Token=IQoJb3JpZ2luX2VjEDAaCWV1LXdlc3QtMSJHMEUCIEyp6bLPtu3ZI6nVqicsJ%2BzJSliZUNHKHnUPH2tLf93tAiEA1%2BujGtASuAF7PgPtj%2F6GSbZGGJvcZ6GS6EZCUtSpHVQq%2FgMIuf%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2F%2FARAAGgw3NzQ5NjM0NTg5NzkiDI%2FxM5%2BA8KS10jW2rSrSA3287aVwyVSR9YHJeddeBUowA1DpqWrTD6hFHagJRL4M7U%2BHdwwI7TNjlwOqc5wTpCaVflDal8jmgsOUTPldoX5s%2Bt6Am8X4e1JuCxQaZwwAdklBc7NGY%2FAOyd2G4CBuG0k3zVvo9817v7%2BpeuTjHkUtX%2F8bETbejSEC%2FNnXSOR%2FKavjifnH00qWXMwmDfU8zyHSnI6akyPa2GjsISFbnZbTmhXwKVjj7hEdONCeGmWYnPSH%2FBI%2F3An7XDEXs8LJVbAaNfWvOufT1bVGIdIJuqW5%2BW78rN1TfQnzKwDIsNbtH8B7HunAbsSjUuTGUgOSWaBqLtFOj6aT7%2BRZICB4bv0vZjSPht6EwFTRSUiBCE6kWCQYYrtweykW%2BZn8agS38SBpVv9n9lYjUcFjwXU%2FOBiXeM9pqG39zNhRaxb8eMFMTH9ZcY4q1Cj7fgBzKJePRxCoZjHo2pRDo7m55DWwb2HR%2F11adUSoBWA7lbO%2B2g47Sal1I8AsU%2FElrOyXOcVfTiWFI5GhsHi8m1ppJNG%2Fx%2BUU9Mc0hPvOonVWI1nTViCaMYFozJoG3FZ4M%2F7mBwRom0m5trXFvBfATexwBQ6TXLf%2FQ2W66%2Ft9OrxKqPv4MpsCcfww16rRmAY6pQEXavskLq4crV74D2xu8VMNrKoIhnT71QfpDEpGdJyyc9TNONLY0ZADuM9mXWSJQgLw6dpxcVi2OiA3W92WLlpoyqI4f5%2BJ4QcUIPswi0R1q%2FPsR60pWBg1fnlUlySx3na55O%2F8s6HduclEd7szODLseL8gUJh6X8lbba3FxXZmcz9dgqHCmQqIwPhwRWZuueu4y8UUaxOmqK3uIpzK6IgUF%2Fz1WQY%3D&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&response-content-disposition=attachment%3B%20filename%3D%22how-bitcoin-mining-can-transform-the-energy-industry.pdf%22&response-content-type=application%2Fpdf&X-Amz-Signature=09d9aca5c9bdf7c962850be59c3c039da384da31177a0fabcc7df911b4ef2aa1

SHA256 is not encryption, it is a hash and it is one way. There no "magic" encryption, if you want to store something and retrieve it symmetrically you need a key to store it and to retrieve it. Please don't advice people on anything encryption related ever again, you could do some serious damage.

Mentions:#SHA

Then we will make SHA 256,000 encryption

Mentions:#SHA

Qq: what happens when we make computers that can process SHA 256 encryption 1000x faster than today? Won’t that compromise the security of BTC?

Mentions:#SHA#BTC

> Credit cards provide horrendous security. It's a system full of security weak points, that has been broken many times. Crypto has your money protected behind a SHA-256 encryption that has never been broken. If crypto is hacked or your key is stolen, you're shit out of luck. That's not the case with credit cards.

Mentions:#SHA

Credit card transaction fee for a $100 purchase: $1.50-$3.50. Crypto transaction fee for a $100 purchase: BTC: $0.96, XMR $0.001, XLM $0.0000011 The credit card system is always gonna be more expensive, because it has many moving parts and lots of pockets to pay. Credit cards provide horrendous security. It's a system full of security weak points, that has been broken many times. Crypto has your money protected behind a SHA-256 encryption that has never been broken. The credit card system is a completely inefficient system, full of 3rd parties, middlemen, weak points, issues, where a transaction takes 24hrs to 72hrs to finality, before all parties are paid. Most crypto can reach finality in seconds. That's why you don't need any IOUs, and can have real genuine transactions.

Exactly. * Quantum Computers can't break SHA256 (used in PoW mining), but elliptic curves (used in private/public key cryptography). * NIST has already published several [post-quantum cryptography schemes](https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2022/07/nist-announces-first-four-quantum-resistant-cryptographic-algorithms). * If Bitcoiners ever felt that practical quantum computers were even starting to become a potential threat, a soft fork could be written and deployed ASAP.

Mentions:#SHA#ASAP

13 years after the creation of Bitcoin Still: * 10 Minutes Per Block * Difficulty Adjustment Every 2,016 Blocks * 21 Million * SHA-256 * 99.99% Uptime * Never Hacked * Open Source * Decentralized * Immutable * Growing * ...

Mentions:#SHA

When you bring this truth to light, some people say, what certainties? Well, the certainties that Bitcoin gives you are many. 13 years after its creation, still: * 10 Minutes Per Block * Difficulty Adjustment Every 2,016 Blocks * 21 Million * SHA-256 * 99.99% Uptime * Never Hacked * Open Source * Decentralized * Immutable * Growing

Mentions:#SHA

> Btw SHA-256 has never been compromised The sha-2 family is considered to have flaws; specifically that you can continue a hash by appending more data to the message because they arent finalized. sha-3 addresses these flaws; but as far as we know they have no impact on the way sha is used by bitcoin.

Mentions:#SHA

Fantastic! Bitcoin uses double SHA-256, meaning that it applies the hash functions twice. Btw SHA-256 has never been compromised and is considered one of the most secure cryptographic hash functions. Thanks for sharing this video! Cheers, Kraken- Rosa

Mentions:#SHA

It isn't a waste, it's securing a global, open and permissionless currency. Those ASICS cannot do anything other than hash SHA256, if you turn them to any other task they'll suck. They would never have been made if not for this purpose.

Mentions:#SHA

That bitcoin's SHA256 algorithm might be vulnerable to the increasing processing power of AI

Mentions:#SHA

>I thought I write up a non technical easy to understand guide to a blockchain and mining. Immediately followed by >\*\* The first and foremost important thing to understand is the SHA256 hash. &#x200B; No description of what a blockchain actually is and why it's neat. Also it's nonce, not nounce.

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Bitcoin uses the SHA256 hashing algo, try again…

Mentions:#SHA

SHA-256 good one there

Mentions:#SHA

*As a crypto maxinalist, I looked at him and I asked him if he knew what a blockchain was, if he knew what were nodes, PoW, PoS, SHA-256 or what even his cryptography.* This technical knowledge wouldn't help for evaluating wether the entire crypto space is "a scam" or not. Would have asked him if he knows the benefits of decentralization. With decentralized crypto asset everyone can suddenly provide complex services and earn instead of banks or corporations. Examples: cloud storage, money lending, streaming infrastructure...

Mentions:#SHA

>I looked at him and I asked him if he knew what a blockchain was, if he knew what were nodes, PoW, PoS, SHA-256 or what even his cryptography. This is such a chad move. Well done OP.

Mentions:#SHA#OP
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Quantum computing is not a risk to SHA2. Why does this have to be repeated every time?

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

I’m not sure I understand. You’re saying Putin can crack SHA-256, or has some other plan to takeover bitcoin?

Mentions:#SHA

That doesn’t change the fact that GPUs and CPUs *can* mine the SHA256 algorithm.

Mentions:#SHA

GPUs can mine SHA256 last time I checked

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

I guess when all is said and done, I thought the complete failure of BSV to grab any value in the SHA-256 world ($52 for a BSV, the equivalent of a full bitcoin ) would be convincing enough to anyone past 8th grade level that Wright is the gangster of morons. I can't believe what I read about not being able to download the White Paper in the UK.

Mentions:#BSV#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Defend what? How does a quantum computer guess a SHA-256 hash?

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Worthy enough to be made into a SHA256 coin?

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

A quantum computer isn't just a `really fast` computer. * It is something entirely different. * There will be tasks, a classic computer can preform **better than a quantum computer** * There will be tasks, a quantum computer can preform **better than a classic computer** * Main take away is quantum computers don't **replace**, or make classic computers obsolete. They instead run side by side, each doing what they are good at. Now with that said, as far as I understand it, the scientific field, doesn't even agree if these new quantum computer will be good at solving the SHA-256 or other cryptographic algorithms. * So that's still a mystery in and itself. Also, we are multiple breakthroughs away from quantum computers. As in, we need a few Einsteins and Newtons to come along with shit like the theory of relativity or gravity. So ya to sum it up: We don't know, and It's far away, that 50 year number you lay out could be 500 hundred years or maybe only 5 years, we just don't know. * However, all that doesn't matter cause we just change the mining Algo for bitcoin, its just code after all...

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

You need to be careful as the answer is fairly technical and had to do with the relationship between a private key and a public address. A private key is basically just a huge random number. From this number you can easily calculate the **public key**, which is NOT the public address. Going back, however, is darn hard: Given a public key you can only get the private key by brute force, trying all the possible private keys, and this will take you a million times the age of the universe, or more, on average. This is what QC breaks. Going from the public key to the private key. So it achieves the he "impossible". What about public addresses? The long strings of random characters you share with others when you want to get money? To get from the public key to the private address there's two (I think) rounds of hashing. (I'm not a super expert so may be wrong, but I think it's SHA256 and RIPEMD160.) This hashing further scrambles the public key so before attempting to break the public key with QC you must break these two additional operations. And WC cannot do that anymore than traditional computers can. This is why we say Bitcoin is "safe" from QC. A caveat. When you spend your coins you actually reveal the public key, which is visible on the blockchain. That means, with QC, an attacker could take all the money associated with that ine specific public key. The good thing here is that when you spend your coins you spend them all and get the change in a new address, which the attacker cannot touch. However... of people keep using the same address over and over for receiving money, treating Bitcoin addresses as bank accounts of sorts, then all money deposited to the same address in the future will be at risk with QC. That's one of the reasons why address reuse is strongly discouraged. All modern wallets "discard" addresses after a single use, so you need to be intentionally onto something to actually reuse addresses. So not only it's more difficult, it's also dumb.

Mentions:#SHA

>Only threat i know about is that quantum processors can bruteforce wallets easily They can calculate your private key from your public key (wallet address) if you are using a vulnerably signature scheme. It has nothing to do with seed phrases, and they would not actually be able to learn your seed phrase, although there is no practical difference because with your private key they can forge transactions for your wallet and take all your coins. >be able to perform 51% attacks on PoW networks This is also not true. The integrity of a PoW blockchain is protected by hashing, which is only very slightly vulnerable to quantum attacks. SHA256, for instance, would still be quite secure against a quantum computer for many years.

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

No. Anybody can copy Bitcoin's source code and this has already been done before. But you can't make a carbon copy of the Bitcoin network because even if you copy Bitcoin's source code, this copy would not have Bitcoin's network of nodes and miners. It would not have the enormous hashrate that Bitcoin has. It would not have the number of nodes that Bitcoin has. It would not be as secure as Bitcoin. It would not have the infrastructure that Bitcoin has. It would not have the adoption that Bitcoin has. It would not have the value of Bitcoin. It would not be Bitcoin. Not only that, but the copy would be extremely easy to 51% attack because if it uses an exact copy of Bitcoin's source code, then it would still use the same hashing algorithm as Bitcoin and there's already a very large amount of SHA-256 hashing application specific integrated circuits that could be used to attack the copy at any time.

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Not entirely correct. It's possible they could be recovered one day. But sort of like gold left behind at old mines its prohibitively expensive and we currently do not have the capability of doing it. SHA256D could be broken one day. Will it be anytime soon and should anybody worry? No. But its likely it will be one day, just probably not in our lifetimes. When it becomes possible Bitcoin will move on to a new algorithm. Those old lost coins will then be "mineable" as they are still in keys using the now old algorithm. Those will be wild times.

Mentions:#SHA
r/BitcoinSee Comment

Yes the US government creates a transparent ledger where any and all transactions are permanently recorded throughout all of history and can't be altered, confiscated or frozen. This totally benefits the US government. The only thing that came from the US government by CIA proxy was the SHA protocol and is the reason conspiracists are convinced Bitcoin is invented by the US government but that's like saying cars are invented by the US government because they invented rubber tires.