Sha256 Decrypt & Encrypt - More than 15.000.000.000 hashes
Sha256 Decrypt & Encrypt - More than 15.000.000.000 hashes
sha256 - Bitcoin Stack Exchange
A physicist’s journey into cracking the bitcoin. Hacker Noon
What if sha-256 is cracked ? : Bitcoin - reddit
What Is SHA-256 And How Is It Related to Bitcoin ...
How fucked would bitcoin be if SHA256 was cracked tomorrow?
Of course, it would not allow you to spend someone else's coins as you still wouldn't know their private key. But, it would completely mess up mining. Suddenly it would be incredibly easy to mine a block. Blocks would be spat out far faster than they could be sent over the network. And the difficulty adjustments would have no effect. Plus, the contents of the block (the transactions) would no longer be set in stone since they use merkle trees to store the data which uses SHA 256. So you wouldn't even know what the actual transactions were, as somebody else could come up with a different list of transactions without the mining solution becoming invalid. Seems to be that the only solution would just be to freeze bitcoin, patch a new hashing algorithm in place of SHA256, and press play?
[uncensored-r/Bitcoin] Can a sha256 be cracked or brute force?
The following post by quin24 is being replicated because the post has been silently removed. The original post can be found(in censored form) at this link: np.reddit.com/ Bitcoin/comments/7fv0an The original post's content was as follows:
If a hash consist only of [0-9] can it be crack? If yes, is there a program for this?
I guess all of us expect Bitcoin to grow and really establish itself among the mainstream, but what would be possible factors that can make the whole descentralized currency project fail at this point?
Hello. 👋🏻 Today we will tell you about ACIS-mining and its 3 best algorithms. 📌 With the advent of ASICs for mining, it became possible to mine Bitcoin in much larger quantities than using video cards. ASIC is an integrated circuit specialized to solve a specific problem, in our case, only for bitcoin mining. These schemes are many times more profitable than video cards, because with more power (hash calculation speed) they consume much less energy. This served as a good reason to create a cryptocurrency mining business. 📌 In bitcoin and other blockchain systems, the complexity of mining depends on how quickly the miners find the block. Compared with the GPU and CPU, specialized #ASIC miners solve #PoW puzzles better and are therefore able to quickly find new blocks. 📌 Since PoW is still the preferred mining consensus mechanism, we propose to take a multiple algorithm approach. Instead of trying to use algorithms which are ASIC resistant, we propose to use algorithms which have had ASIC miners for quite some time. These are: #SHA256, #Scrypt, and #X11. 🔹 The SHA-256 algorithm has a number of advantages over other information protection technologies. Over the years of use in the cryptocurrency industry, he has shown his resistance to various hacking attempts. 🔹 Scrypt is a cryptocurrency mining algorithm that was previously interesting to many single miners in view of its resistance to the so-called “hardware attack”. The speed of creating blocks in a Scrypt-based blockchain is about 30 seconds. The hashrate, like Ethash, is measured in Megahash per second. Scrypt, first of all, became popular due to its use in Litecoin #cryptocurrency. 🔹 X11 is an encryption algorithm in which eleven are used instead of one function. This means that this technology can provide a high degree of security, because in order to harm the system, an attacker will have to crack all 11 functions, which is very unlikely, because the changes made will be visible after breaking the first function, and developers will have a lot of time to protect the system before the hacker reaches the eleventh function. Since these miners are already in wide use, the distribution of mining should be fair and even. Furthermore, the use of three different algorithms results in a far less chance of any single person gaining a majority hash rate share. Lastly, we use the Multishield difficulty adjustment algorithm to prevent difficulty spike issues resulting from burst mining. Read more about PYRK mining solutions here: https://www.pyrk.org Read our Whitepaper to know more about the project: https://www.pyrk.org/Pyrk-Whitepaper.pdf https://preview.redd.it/rxmlr7wt1k251.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=162f9ddaacb3cf3e137638464a208bdf25e50a21
If SHA256 became unsecure, how would Bitcoin move to a different hashing algorithm?
From what I understand SHA256 is an incredibly secure algorithm that underpins much of the Internet's security, not just Bitcoin. However, surely with ever increasing computing power there will come a time when it is possible to break / find a flaw in / crack? When this happens, how would Bitcoin move to a different and more secure algorithm? Thanks for any help and I'm sorry if I don't understand properly. Edit: I'm well aware that in the eventuality SHA256 breaks down:
We're likely a very long time away
A lot of things would go to shit, not just Bitcoin
It was more just asking how, theoretically, a decentralised system such as Bitcoin would agree on and adopt a new system.
No, your Bitcoin is not at risk from quantum computing. You got played.
The claim: Quantum computers can hack bitcoin and its right around the corner. Reality: There is no known way that quantum computers can break SHA256 (only the signing elliptic curve/ECDSA). So cold wallets will always be safe (this means you have not made an outgoing transaction in that wallet) This also means you will always be safe in actively making transactions as long as wallet providers provide the functionality to constantly move your funds to a new address on each transaction (this already exists in several wallets). There is a larger discussion on upgrading bitcoin, the fact that quantum computers are not even close to being able to crack ECDSA, etc. But I'm just going to leave it at what I said above. Your Bitcoin is not at risk from quantum computing.
The fud campaigns on quantum computing has been organized by traders half a dozen times over the past 5 years at the end of consolidation triangles, which is exactly what happened this time.
12632.37162517 BTC hidden in this picture below: 12632.37162517 BTC hidden in 1CoV19 Figure it out, find the key to the Bitcoin, and claim the prize. Whoever cracks the code can do whatever he/she wants (including donating to charity). While solving the puzzle you can find private keys to 5 more BTC addresses with huge value. Congrats to the genius who figures it out. View the address:16eht5osxarvsX9rFBuNgey18N3TFxeE1P HINTS: Address: 1CoV19Nw1731inbx38t3Y2mcdnCehA9FmJ 12 Words 1CoV19.jpeg A=16eht5osxarvsX9rFBuNgey18N3TFxeE1P B=1CoV19Nw1731inbx38t3Y2mcdnCehA9FmJ Private Key A= SHA256(passphrase) 1CoV19.jpeg + B Mnemonic Code Converter Sha256 — Reverse lookup, unhash and decrypt Example: This private key: KyTxSACvHPPDWnuE9cVi86kDgs59UFyVwx2Y3LPpAs88TqEdCKvb The public address is:13JNB8GtymAPaqAoxRZrN2EgmzZLCkbPsh The raw bytes for the private key:4300d94bef2ee84bd9d0781398fd96daf98e419e403adc41957fb679dfa1facd These bytes are actually sha256 of this public address! 1LGUyTbp7nbqp8NQy2tkc3QEjy7CWwdAJj ....more Examples: 1HwxL1vutUc42ikh3RBnM4v2dVRHPTrTve from Sha256(1FfmbHfnpaZjKFvyi1okTjJJusN455paPH) 1FNF3xfTE53LVLQMvH6qteVqrNzwn2g2H8 from Sha256(1H21ndKEuMqZbeMMCqrYArCdV8WeicGehB 13FzEhD3WpX682G7b446NFZV6TXHH7BaQv Sha256(1E1rSGgugyNYF3TTr12pedv4UHoWxv5CeD) 1LVRWmpfKKcRZcKvi5ZGWGx5wU1HCNEdZZ Sha256(1CVPe9A5xFoQBEYhFP46nRrzf9wCS4KLFm) 1HhNZhMm4YFPSFvUXE6wLYPx63BF7MRJCJ Sha256(145Sph2eiNGp5WVAkdJKg9Z2PMhTGSS9iT) 1G6qfGz7eVDBGDJEy6Jw6Gkg8zaoWku8W5 Sha256(18EF7uwoJnKx7YAg72DUv4Xqbyd4a32P9f) 1MNhKuKbpPjELGJA5BRrJ4qw8RajGESLz6 Sha256(15WLziyvhPu1qVKkQ62ooEnCEu8vpyuTR5) 18XAotZvJNoaDKY7dkfNHuTrAzguazetHE Sha256(15SP99eiBZ43SMuzzCc9AaccuTxF5AQaat) 1HamTvNJfggDioTbPgnC2ujQpCj4BEJqu Sha256(14nuZCWe76kWigUKAjFxyJLFHQyLTsKXYk) 17iqGkzW5Y7miJjd5B2gP5Eztx8kcCDwRM Sha256(1MB3L1eTnHo1nQSN7Lmgepb7iipWqFjhYX) 15M7QfReFDY2SZssyBALDQTFVV1VDdVBLA Sha256(16bjY7SynPYKrTQULjHy8on3WENxCmK4ix) 1LgwKwv9kt8BwVvn6bVWj8KcqpP9JSP1Mh Sha256(1Q81rAHbNebKiNH7HD9Mh2xtH6jgzbAxoF) Address: 1CoV19Nw1731inbx38t3Y2mcdnCehA9FmJ will be the next Puzzle if the community decides to raise its value. Its private key hints will revealed here to solve. Good Luck .....
https://preview.redd.it/yeib74adcoy41.png?width=900&format=png&auto=webp&s=8e50b543a01a25860c7c732c17a1f2da338cd7c6 In the blockchain system, since there is no centralized organization responsible for managing the backup user sensitive data, the generation, storage, use, retrieval, destruction, and update of the user’s private key all need to be guaranteed by the user. Therefore, for the entire life cycle of the private key, there needs to be a strict way to manage and control it, to ensure the security of the asset. Today ’s NeoLine Talk, let ’s talk about how to ensure the security of the private key life cycle.
Private key generation
Private key: A 256-bit binary random number whose quality depends entirely on the quality of the random number that generated the private key. If the randomness of the key generation process is insufficient to make it predictable, then all subsequent security protection measures will be in vain. Random numbers are the cornerstone of information security systems based on modern cryptography. The security of the entire system depends entirely on the generation efficiency and quality of random number sequences. The core of high-quality random numbers is “unpredictability”. There are two types of random numbers: pseudo-random and true random. Pseudo-random is also called pseudo-random. It generally relies on seeds and algorithms. Knowing the seeds or the random numbers that have been generated, you can get the next random numbers, which is predictable. The current mainstream blockchain system is the private key generated by this method … True random numbers are generally based on the design of the hardware. Random numbers are generated according to the external temperature, voltage, electromagnetic field, environmental noise, etc., and the unpredictability of randomness is greatly increased. All security cryptographic chips in the financial field adopt this design.
Let’s see in detail how to generate a private key from a random number?
The first step in generating a private key is also the most important. It is to find a sufficiently secure source of entropy, that is, a source of randomness. Generating a Bitcoin private key is essentially the same as “choose a number between 1 and 2256”. As long as the selected results are unpredictable or unrepeatable, the specific method of selecting numbers is not important. Bitcoin software uses a random number generator at the bottom of the operating system to generate 256 bits of entropy (randomness). Normally, the operating system random number generator is initialized by an artificial random source, and it may also need to be initialized by shaking the mouse continuously within a few seconds. More precisely, the private key can be any number between 1 and n-1, where n is a constant (n = 1.158 * 1077, slightly less than 2256) and is defined by the order of the elliptic curve used by Bitcoin. To generate such a private key, we randomly choose a 256-bit number and check whether it is less than n-1. From a programming point of view, it is generally by taking a long string of random bytes from a cryptographically secure random source and using the SHA256 hash algorithm to perform operations, so that a 256-bit number can be easily generated. If the operation result is less than n-1, we have a suitable private key. Otherwise, we repeat it with another random number.
Private key storage
Each bitcoin address corresponds to a private key, and mastering the private key means mastering the bitcoin in its corresponding address. In layman’s terms, a key opens a lock. If the Bitcoin address is a lock, then the private key is the key to the lock. The storage and use of private keys are generally divided into soft and hard implementations. Soft implementation, storage, and use are in the form of software. After the key is generated, it is stored in the user terminal or hosted on the server as a file or character string. When used, the private key plain text is read directly or through simple password control into the memory, and the private key calculation is completed by the CPU. This storage and use method has a lot of security risks and is easy to be copied, stolen, brute-forced by hackers or ghosts. Hard implementation generally relies on a dedicated cryptographic security chip or cryptographic device as a carrier. There are generally mechanisms such as physical protection, sensitive data protection, and key protection to ensure that the private key must be generated by dedicated hardware. At any time and under any circumstances, the private key cannot appear outside the cryptographic device in clear text; the key stored inside the cryptographic device should have an effective key protection mechanism to prevent dissection, detection, and illegal reading. The private key cannot be exported, and only the signature value can be calculated and output. But whether it is soft or hard, as long as others know your private key, you can transfer your assets. Remember, whoever holds the private key is the real owner of the asset.
Safe use of private keys
When using the private key, it is necessary to ensure the security of the use environment, and access, reading, and writing of the private key file need to have relevant permission control. After the use is completed, all sensitive data cached in the memory needs to be cleared using a dedicated function to prevent the leakage of sensitive data. From the perspective of password cracking, the private key should be replaced after a certain period of use. This is a problem involving the destruction and update of the private key, which we will introduce later.
Private key recovery
If a traditional centralized bank loses its U-shield or forgets its password, it can rebind a new U-shield (private key) through the account system. Accounts and private keys are logically bound and are operated by centralized banks while meeting risk control requirements. There are also some traditional centralized payment institutions. When the user’s asset certificate is lost, the centralized institution can retrieve the relevant data through its identity certificate. But in the blockchain system, there is no centralized organization to help us back up sensitive data such as private keys. Therefore, when designing the system’s private key management scheme, it is necessary to provide multiple back-ups and recovery methods, such as the use of mnemonic words or the use of passwords plus local ciphertext files to restore private key data. But if your mnemonic is also lost, it means you lost everything.
Private key destruction
When the user needs to destroy the private key data, it is necessary to ensure that all the private key data stored in the backup are completely deleted and destroyed.
Private key update
In the field of blockchain, the private key is the only credential that represents the user’s identity or digital assets. If the private key needs to be updated, registration or digital asset transfer must be re-bound. Therefore, when you need to replace the private key, you need to ensure that the new private key is safely generated or imported, the assets have been safely transferred, and the old private key is safely destroyed. Everything starts with visibility. The security of the private key is related to the security of digital assets and the security of personal privacy, so it is very important to securely ensure every step of the life cycle of the private key.
Why quantum computers do not pose a risk to bitcoin. (The quantum fud campaign has worked in the past and it worked this time. People need to learn to rebuke this false narrative)
The claim: Quantum computers can hack bitcoin and its right around the corner. Reality: There is no known way that quantum computers can break SHA256 (only the signing elliptic curve/ECDSA). So cold wallets will always be safe (this means you have not made an outgoing transaction in that wallet) This also means you will always be safe in actively making transactions as long as wallet providers upgrade the functionality to constantly move your funds to a new address on each transaction (this already exists in several wallets). Its a simple software update. There is a larger discussion on upgrading bitcoin, the fact that quantum computers are not even close to being able to crack ECDSA, etc. But I'm just going to leave it at what I said above. Your Bitcoin is not at risk from quantum computing.
The real reason Bitcoin is skyrocketing and why CME is launching Bitcoin futures on Dec 18, 2017. Someone is close to building a real quantum computer.
We will soon see someone become the fastest trillionaire in history. Why you ask? Because Quantum Computing can defeat Bitcoin's SHA256 blockchains. http://www.newsweek.com/quantum-computers-kill-bitcoin-cryptocurrency-509053 The reason we place so much trust in Bitcoins is because right now, it would take a typical PC 3.17*1064 years to brute force a wallet. This pretty much translates into never. But quantum computing changes the game. Soon, due to quantum computers, 256bit encryption schemes will become easily crackable. Enter, the CME Bitcoin futures. For those who don't know how futures work, it's just a contract to purchase something at an agreed price at an agreed date. Say you own 1 bitcoin. I go to you and say, I'll buy that bitcoin off of you in 1 month for $15K. If you think bitcoins will be priced less than $15k after a month, then you would agree to the contract with me, right? So we make the deal. If bitcoins are worth $10,000 next month, I'm out $5,000 because I still have to pay you $15,000 for the bitcoin. On the other hand, if bitcoins are worth $20,000, you lose $5,000. Because you still have to sell me that bitcoin for $15,000. Fair enough? Okay, now here's the part that gets tricky. The thing is, YOU don't have to actually have a bitcoin to make this contract with me. So what would that look like? Say you agree to sell me 1 bitcoin in 1 month at $15,000. Let's say the price of bitcoins at that date is $10,000. You just made $5k in profit. Why? Because you just have to go on the web, buy a bitcoin at $10k and sell it to me for $15k. Bam. $5K profit. On the other hand, say the current market price of bitcoins are $20k. Well, now you are out $5,000. You have to go to the web and buy a bitcoin for $20k and sell it to me for $15k. Loss of $5,000. Congratulations. You now know what "shorting the futures market" means. It's simply selling something you don't own in the hopes that prices will be cheaper when you actually have to deliver. Alright, now we know how futures work. So what's this got to do with the real bitcoin market? We've all seen the dramatic rise in the value of bitcoin this year. It's astronomical. Why is this happening? There are literally 100 reasons people will give you for why this is happening. And the truth is, all of them are plausible. But here's what I think. I think someone, or some govt, is driving up prices for a specific reason. To short the bitcoin market using futures. What makes bitcoins secure? What makes your wallet that you have on your harddrive or USB drive secure? SHA256 bit encryption. The specifics of this encryption is beyond the scope of this post but suffice to say that it would take a long ass time to try to bruteforce guess the password. What would happen if that password could be broken in a matter of week? Simple. Every blockchain currency, as well as all passwords you use, will become crackable. Now, most servers, such as your bank's or your business, have a safeguard against this. They only allow something like 5 attempts to be made before they let you try again. But what about bitcoins? Umm,.... nope. You can bruteforce attack bitcoin wallets as much as you'd like simply because bitcoin wallets don't exist on your computer. It exists in the ledger which everyone has access to. You only have the password that allows you access to that particular entry on the ledger that proves that you have such and such amount of bitcoins. So, if you develop a computer that can crack SHA256 encryption in a matter of weeks, how would you use that to make money? Simple. Short the hell out of bitcoin futures. Then release the news that you have a computer that's able to crack SHA256. Bam. The value of bitcoin goes to ZERO. No, I'm not exaggerating. The value will literally go to zero. You just made more money than anyone in history in the shortest amount of time. Now, this isn't all speculation. You can prove me wrong by observing the price of the CME futures over time once it starts trading. Selling large amounts of futures will drive the price of the futures down and they will trade below market price (current price). So, even tho 90% of the people think the price of Bitcoins will go up, it could trade at prices lower than the current market price. This will mean that there is a huge seller of this futures. It will prove my point. However, this is not what's going to happen. The futures price will trade at a significant premium (meaning higher than current market prices). Why? Because they're gonna drive this sucker to the max. They're gonna make it go all the way up to $100k while the Quantum Computer is finalized. Then, they will unleash the greatest trade ever known to man. A trade that makes Soros' shorting of the GBP look like child play.
PSA: If you spent your Bitcoin Cash, your Bitcoin public keys are now publicly known. You should move all your Bitcoin to new addresses.
By spending your Bitcoin Cash, you revealed your public keys on the Bitcoin chain, since they initially shared the same addresses. If you're going to move your Bitcoin, you should send them to a new segwit address. This will ensure that your future fees are lower than they otherwise would have been.
Is Crypto Currency truly at risk due to Quantum Computers, and what can you do about it?
Is Crypto Currency truly at risk due to Quantum Computers, and what can you do about it?
There is no denying that the Quantum revolution is coming. Security protocols for the internet, banking, telecommunications, etc... are all at risk, and your Bitcoins (and alt-cryptos) are next! This article is not really about quantum computers[i], but, rather, how they will affect the future of cryptocurrency, and what steps a smart investor will take. Since this is a complicated subject, my intention is to provide just enough relevant information without being too “techy.”
The Quantum Evolution
In 1982, Nobel winning physicist, Richard Feynman, hypothesized how quantum computers[ii] would be used in modern life. Just one year later, Apple released the “Apple Lisa”[iii] – a home computer with a 7.89MHz processor and a whopping 5MB hard drive, and, if you enjoy nostalgia, it used 5.25in floppy disks. Today, we walk around with portable devices that are thousands of times more powerful, and, yet, our modern day computers still work in a simple manner, with simple math, and simple operators[iv]. They now just do it so fast and efficient that we forget what’s happening behind the scenes. No doubt, the human race is accelerating at a remarkable speed, and we’ve become obsessed with quantifying everything - from the everyday details of life to the entire universe[v]. Not only do we know how to precisely measure elementary particles, we also know how to control their actions! Yet, even with all this advancement, modern computers cannot “crack” cryptocurrencies without the use of a great deal more computing power, and since it’s more than the planet can currently supply, it could take millions, if not billions, of years. However, what current computers can’t do, quantum computers can! So, how can something that was conceptualized in the 1980’s, and, as of yet, has no practical application, compromise cryptocurrencies and take over Bitcoin? To best answer this question, let’s begin by looking at a bitcoin address.
What exactly is a Bitcoin address?
Well, in layman terms, a Bitcoin address is used to send and receive Bitcoins, and looking a bit closer (excuse the pun), it has two parts:[vi] A public key that is openly shared with the world to accept payments. A public key that is derived from the private key. The private key is made up of 256 bits of information in a (hopefully) random order. This 256 bit code is 64 characters long (in the range of 0-9/a-f) and further compressed into a 52 character code (using RIPEMD-160). NOTE: Although many people talk about Bitcoin encryption, Bitcoin does not use Encryption. Instead, Bitcoin uses a hashing algorithm (for more info, please see endnote below[vii]). Now, back to understanding the private key: The Bitcoin address “1EHNa6Q4Jz2uvNExL497mE43ikXhwF6kZm” translates to a private key of “5HpHagT65TZzG1PH3CSu63k8DbpvD8s5ip4nEB3kEsreAnchuDf” which further translates to a 256 bit private key of “0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001” (this should go without saying, but do not use this address/private key because it was compromised long ago.) Although there are a few more calculations that go behind the scenes, these are the most relevant details. Now, to access a Bitcoin address, you first need the private key, and from this private key, the public key is derived. With current computers, it’s classically impractical to attempt to find a private key based on a public key. Simply put, you need the private key to know the public key. However, it has already been theorized (and technically proven) that due to private key compression, multiple private keys can be used to access the same public key (aka address). This means that your Bitcoin address has multiple private keys associated with it, and, if someone accidentally discovers or “cracks” any one of those private keys, they have access to all the funds in that specific address. There is even a pool of a few dedicated people hunting for these potential overlaps[viii], and they are, in fact, getting very efficient at it. The creator of the pool also has a website listing every possible Bitcoin private key/address in existence[ix], and, as of this writing, the pool averages 204 trillion keys per day! But wait! Before you get scared and start panic selling, the probability of finding a Bitcoin address containing funds (or even being used) is highly unlikely – nevertheless, still possible! However, the more Bitcoin users, the more likely a “collision” (finding overlapping private/public key pairs)! You see, the security of a Bitcoin address is simply based on large numbers! How large? Well, according to my math, 1.157920892373x1077 potential private keys exist (that number represents over 9,500 digits in length! For some perspective, this entire article contains just over 14,000 characters. Therefore, the total number of Bitcoin addresses is so great that the probability of finding an active address with funds is infinitesimal.
So, how do Quantum Computers present a threat?
At this point, you might be thinking, “How can a quantum computer defeat this overwhelming number of possibilities?” Well, to put it simple; Superposition and Entanglement[x]. Superposition allows a quantum bit (qbit) to be in multiple states at the same time. Entanglement allows an observer to know the measurement of a particle in any location in the universe. If you have ever heard Einstein’s quote, “Spooky Action at a Distance,” he was talking about Entanglement! To give you an idea of how this works, imagine how efficient you would be if you could make your coffee, drive your car, and walk your dog all at the same time, while also knowing the temperature of your coffee before drinking, the current maintenance requirements for your car, and even what your dog is thinking! In a nutshell, quantum computers have the ability to process and analyze countless bits of information simultaneously – and so fast, and in such a different way, that no human mind can comprehend! At this stage, it is estimated that the Bitcoin address hash algorithm will be defeated by quantum computers before 2028 (and quite possibly much sooner)! The NSA has even stated that the SHA256 hash algorithm (the same hash algorithm that Bitcoin uses) is no longer considered secure, and, as a result, the NSA has now moved to new hashing techniques, and that was in 2016! Prior to that, in 2014, the NSA also invested a large amount of money in a research program called “Penetrating Hard Targets project”[xi] which was used for further Quantum Computer study and how to break “strong encryption and hashing algorithms.” Does NSA know something they’re not saying or are they just preemptively preparing? Nonetheless, before long, we will be in a post-quantum cryptography world where quantum computers can crack crypto addresses and take all the funds in any wallet.
What are Bitcoin core developers doing about this threat?
Well, as of now, absolutely nothing. Quantum computers are not considered a threat by Bitcoin developers nor by most of the crypto-community. I’m sure when the time comes, Bitcoin core developers will implement a new cryptographic algorithm that all future addresses/transactions will utilize. However, will this happen before post-quantum cryptography[xii]? Moreover, even after new cryptographic implementation, what about all the old addresses? Well, if your address has been actively used on the network (sending funds), it will be in imminent danger of a quantum attack. Therefore, everyone who is holding funds in an old address will need to send their funds to a new address (using a quantum safe crypto-format). If you think network congestion is a problem now, just wait… Additionally, there is the potential that the transition to a new hashing algorithm will require a hard fork (a soft fork may also suffice), and this could result in a serious problem because there should not be multiple copies of the same blockchain/ledger. If one fork gets attacked, the address on the other fork is also compromised. As a side-note, the blockchain Nebulas[xiii] will have the ability to modify the base blockchain software without any forks. This includes adding new and more secure hashing algorithms over time! Nebulas is due to be released in 2018.
Who would want to attack Bitcoin?
Bitcoin and cryptocurrency represent a threat to the controlling financial system of our modern economy. Entire countries have outright banned cryptocurrency[xiv] and even arrested people[xv], and while discrediting it, some countries are copying cryptocurrency to use (and control) in their economy[xvi]! Furthermore, Visa[xvii], Mastercard[xviii], Discover[xix], and most banks act like they want nothing to do with cryptocurrency, all the while seeing the potential of blockchain technology and developing their own[xx]. Just like any disruptive technology, Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies have their fair share of enemies! As of now, quantum computers are being developed by some of the largest companies in the world, as well as private government agencies. No doubt, we will see a post-quantum cryptography world sooner than most realize. By that point, who knows how long “3 letter agencies” will have been using quantum technology - and what they’ll be capable of!
What can we do to protect ourselves today?
Of course, the best option is to start looking at how Bitcoin can implement new cryptographic features immediately, but it will take time, and we have seen how slow the process can be just for scaling[xxi]. The other thing we can do is use a Bitcoin address only once for outgoing transactions. When quantum computers attack Bitcoin (and other crypto currencies), their first target will be addresses that have outgoing transactions on the blockchain that contain funds. This is due to the fact that when computers first attempt to crack a Bitcoin address, the starting point is when a transaction becomes public. In other words, when the transaction is first signed – a signed transaction is a digital signature derived from the private key, and it validates the transaction on the network. Compared to classical computers, quantum computers can exponentially extrapolate this information. Initially, Bitcoin Core Software might provide some level of protection because it only uses an address once, and then sends the remaining balance (if any) to another address in your keypool. However, third party Bitcoin wallets can and do use an address multiple times for outgoing transactions. For instance, this could be a big problem for users that accept donations (if they don’t update their donation address every time they remove funds). The biggest downside to Bitcoin Core Software is the amount of hard-drive space required, as well as diligently retaining an up-to-date copy of the entire blockchain ledger. Nonetheless, as quantum computers evolve, they will inevitably render SHA256 vulnerable, and although this will be one of the first hash algorithms cracked by quantum computers, it won’t be the last!
Are any cryptocurrencies planning for the post-quantum cryptography world?
Yes, indeed, there are! Here is a short list of ones you may want to know more about:
IOTA[xxii] IOTA uses Winternitz one-time signatures[xxiii]. As the name suggests, an address is considered compromised once it signs a transaction on the network, and, therefore, you can only send from an address one time before it’s compromised.
ADA (Cardano)[xxiv] The Cardano roadmap lists quantum resistant signatures using “BLISS.” While BLISS is a strong hashing method, it has an estimated lifespan with classical computers of 6000 signatures (usages)[xxv] but this number could be significantly reduced with quantum tech.
Ethereum[xxvi] The Ethereum network, as well as many more blockchain networks, use the SHA3[xxvii] hash algorithm which is superior to SHA256. Although this is considered by some to be resistant, it is not technically quantum resistant. There is talk of using Lamport Signatures[xxviii] in the future of Ethereum. Although it is not definite at this point, it’s great to see the developers proactive.
QRL (Quantum Resistant Ledger)[xxix] This blockchain concept was conceived in 2016 and is currently in beta testing. Using XMSS (Extended Merkle Signature Scheme) trees combined with Winternitz one-time signatures (but not one time!), it’s fast, salable and truly quantum resistant. If you have not yet checked out this project, I highly suggest you do. To understand why this project is truly post-quantum cryptography ready, do your own due diligence and read the QRL whitepaper.
Although I am in no way associated with any project listed above, I do hold coins in all as well as Bitcoin, Litecoin and many others. The thoughts above are based on my personal research, but I make no claims to being a quantum scientist or cryptographer. So, don’t take my word for anything. Instead, do your own research and draw your own conclusions. I’ve included many references below, but there are many more to explore. In conclusion, the intention of this article is not to create fear or panic, nor any other negative effects. It is simply to educate. If you see an error in any of my statements, please, politely, let me know, and I will do my best to update the error. Thanks for reading!
A (hopefully mathematically neutral) comparison of Lightning network fees to Bitcoin Cash on-chain fees.
A side note before I begin For context, earlier today, sherlocoinmade a post on this sub asking if Lightning Network transactions are cheaper than on-chain BCH transactions. This user also went on to complain on /bitcointhat his "real" numbers were getting downvoted I was initially going to respond to his post, but after I typed some of my response, I realized it is relevant to a wider Bitcoin audience and the level of analysis done warranted a new post. This wound up being the longest post I've ever written, so I hope you agree. I've placed the TL;DR at the top and bottom for the simple reason that you need to prepare your face... because it's about to get hit with a formidable wall of text. TL;DR: While Lightning node paymentsthemselvescost less than on-chain BCH payments, the associated overhead currently requires a LN channel to produce 16 transactions just to break-even under ideal 1sat/byte circumstances and substantially more as the fee rate goes up. Further, the Lightning network can provide no guarantee in its current state to maintain/reduce fees to 1sat/byte. Let's Begin With An Ideal World Lightning network fees themselves are indeed cheaper than Bitcoin Cash fees, but in order to get to a state where a Lightning network fee can be made, you are required to open a channel, and to get to a state where those funds are spendable, you must close that channel. On the Bitcoin network, the minimum accepted fee is 1sat/byte so for now, we'll assume that ideal scenario of 1sat/byte. We'll also assume the open and close is sent as a simple native Segwit transaction with a weighted size of 141 bytes. Because we have to both open and close, this 141 byte fee will be incurred twice. The total fee for an ideal open/close transaction is 1.8¢ For comparison, a simple transaction on the BCH network requires 226 bytes one time. The minimum fee accepted next-block is 1sat/byte. At the time of writing an ideal BCH transaction fee costs ~ 0.11¢ This means that under idealized circumstances, you must currently make at least 16 transactions on a LN channel to break-even with fees Compounding Factors Our world is not ideal, so below I've listed compounding factors, common arguments, an assessment, and whether the problem is solvable. Problem 1: Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash prices are asymmetrical. Common arguments:
BTC: If Bitcoin Cash had the same price, the fees would be far higher
Yes, this is true. If Bitcoin Cash had the same market price as Bitcoin, our ideal scenario changes substantially. An open and close on Bitcoin still costs 1.8¢ while a simple Bitcoin Cash transaction now costs 1.4¢. The break-even point for a Lightning Channel is now only 2 transactions. Is this problem solvable? Absolutely. Bitcoin Cash has already proposed a reduction in fees to 1sat for every 10 bytes, and that amount can be made lower by later proposals. While there is no substantial pressure to implement this now, if Bitcoin Cash had the same usage as Bitcoin currently does, it is far more likely to be implemented. If implemented at the first proposed reduction rate, under ideal circumstances, a Lightning Channel would need to produce around 13 transactions for the new break even. But couldn't Bitcoin reduce fees similarly The answer there is really tricky. If you reduce on-chain fees, you reduce the incentive to use the Lightning Network as the network becomes more hospitable to micropaments. This would likely increase the typical mempool state and decrease the Lightning Channel count some. The upside is that when the mempool saturates with low transaction fees, users are then re-incentivized to use the lightning network after the lowes fees are saturated with transactions. This should, in theory, produce some level of a transaction fee floor which is probably higher on average than 0.1 sat/byte on the BTC network. Problem 2: This isn't an ideal world, we can't assume 1sat/byte fees Common arguments:
BCH: If you tried to open a channel at peak fees, you could pay $50 each way BTC: LN wasn't implemented which is why the fees are low now
Both sides have points here. It's true that if the mempool was in the same state as it was in December of 2017, that a user could have potentially been incentivized to pay an open and close channel fee of up to 1000 sat/byte to be accepted in a reasonable time-frame. With that being said, two factors have resulted in a reduced mempool size of Bitcoin: Increased Segwit and Lightning Network Usage, and an overall cooling of the market. I'm not going to speculate as to what percentage of which is due to each factor. Instead, I'm going to simply analyze mempool statistics for the last few months where both factors are present. Let's get an idea of current typical Bitcoin network usage fees by asking Johoe quick what the mempool looks like. For the last few months, the bitcoin mempool has followed almost the exact same pattern. Highest usage happens between 10AM and 3PM EST with a peak around noon. Weekly, usage usually peaks on Tuesday or Wednesday with enough activity to fill blocks with at least minimum fee transactions M-F during the noted hours and usually just shy of block-filling capacity on Sat and Sun. These observations can be additionally evidenced by transaction counts on bitinfocharts. It's also easier to visualize on bitinfocharts over a longer time-frame. Opening a channel Under pre-planned circumstances, you can offload channel creation to off-peak hours and maintain a 1sat/byte rate. The primary issue arises in situations where either 1) LN payments are accepted and you had little prior knowledge, or 2) You had a previous LN pathway to a known payment processor and one or more previously known intermediaries are offline or otherwise unresponsive causing the payment to fail. Your options are: A) Create a new LN channel on-the-spot where you're likely to incur current peak fee rates of 5-20sat/byte. B) Create an on-chain payment this time and open a LN channel when fees are more reasonable. C) Use an alternate currency for the transaction. There is a fundamental divide among the status of C. Some people view Bitcoin as (primarily) a storage of value, and thus as long as there are some available onramps and offramps, the currency will hold value. There are other people who believe that fungibility is what gives cryptocurrency it's value and that option C would fundamentally undermine the value of the currency. I don't mean to dismiss either argument, but option C opens a can of worms that alone can fill economic textbooks. For the sake of simplicity, we will throw out option C as a possibility and save that debate for another day. We will simply require that payment is made in crypto. With option B, you would absolutely need to pay the peak rate (likely higher) for a single transaction as a Point-of-Sale scenario with a full mempool would likely require at least one confirm and both parties would want that as soon as possible after payment. It would not be unlikely to pay 20-40 sat/byte on a single transaction and then pay 1sat/byte for an open and close to enable LN payments later. Even in the low end, the total cost is 20¢ for on-chain + open + close. With present-day-statistics, your LN would have to do 182 transactions to make up for the one peak on-chain transaction you were forced to do. With option A, you still require one confirm. Let's also give the additional leeway that in this scenario you have time to sit and wait a couple of blocks for your confirm before you order / pay. You can thus pay peak rates alone and not peak + ensure next block rates. This will most likely be in the 5-20 sat/byte range. With 5sat/byte open and 1sat/byte close, your LN would have to do 50 transactions to break even In closing, fees are incurred by the funding channel, so there could be scenarios where the receiving party is incentivized to close in order to spend outputs and the software automatically calculates fees based on current rates. If this is the case, the receiving party could incur a higher-than-planned fee to the funding party. With that being said, any software that allows the funding party to set the fee beforehand would avoid unplanned fees, so we'll assume low fees for closing. Is this problem solvable? It depends. In order to avoid the peak-fee open/close ratio problem, the Bitcoin network either needs to have much higher LN / Segwit utilization, or increase on-chain capacity. If it gets to a point where transactions stack up, users will be required to pay more than 1sat/byte per transaction and should expect as much. Current Bitcoin network utilization is close enough to 100% to fill blocks during peak times. I also did an export of the data available at Blockchair.com for the last 3000 blocks which is approximately the last 3 weeks of data. According to their block-weight statistics, The average Bitcoin block is 65.95% full. This means that on-chain, Bitcoin can only increase in transaction volume by around 50% and all other scaling must happen via increased Segwit and LN use. Problem 3: You don't fully control your LN channel states. Common arguments:
BCH: You can get into a scenario where you don't have output capacity and need to open a new channel. BCH: A hostile actor can cause you to lose funds during a high-fee situation where a close is forced. BTC: You can easily re-load your channel by pushing outbound to inbound. BCH: You can't control whether nodes you connect to are online or offline.
There's a lot to digest here, but LN is essentially a 2-way contract between 2 parties. Not only does the drafting party pay the fees as of right now, but connected 3rd-parties can affect the state of this contract. There are some interesting scenarios that develop because of it and you aren't always in full control of what side. Lack of outbound capacity First, it's true that if you run out of outbound capacity, you either need to reload or create a new channel. This could potentially require 0, 1, or 2 additional on-chain transactions. If a network loop exists between a low-outbound-capacity channel and yourself, you could push transactional capacity through the loop back to the output you wish to spend to. This would require 0 on-chain transactions and would only cost 1 (relatively negligible) LN fee charge. For all intents and purposes... this is actually kind of a cool scenario. If no network loop exists from you-to-you, things get more complex. I've seen proposals like using Bitrefill to push capacity back to your node. In order to do this, you would have an account with them and they would lend custodial support based on your account. While people opting for trustless money would take issue in 3rd party custodians, I don't think this alone is a horrible solution to the LN outbound capacity problem... Although it depends on the fee that bitrefill charges to maintain an account and account charges could negate the effectiveness of using the LN. Still, we will assume this is a 0 on-chain scenario and would only cost 1 LN fee which remains relatively negligible. If no network loop exists from you and you don't have a refill service set up, you'll need at least one on-chain payment to another LN entity in exchange for them to push LN capacity to you. Let's assume ideal fee rates. If this is the case, your refill would require an additional 7 transactions for that channel's new break-even. Multiply that by number of sat/byte if you have to pay more. Opening a new channel is the last possibility and we go back to the dynamics of 13 transactions per LN channel in the ideal scenario. Hostile actors There are some potential attack vectors previously proposed. Most of these are theoretical and/or require high fee scenarios to come about. I think that everyone should be wary of them, however I'm going to ignore most of them again for the sake of succinctness. This is not to be dismissive... it's just because my post length has already bored most casual readers half to death and I don't want to be responsible for finishing the job. Pushing outbound to inbound While I've discussed scenarios for this push above, there are some strange scenarios that arise where pushing outbound to inbound is not possible and even some scenarios where a 3rd party drains your outbound capacity before you can spend it. A while back I did a testnet simulation to prove that this scenario can and will happen it was a post response that happened 2 weeks after the initial post so it flew heavily under the radar, but the proof is there. The moral of this story is in some scenarios, you can't count on loaded network capacity to be there by the time you want to spend it. Online vs Offline Nodes We can't even be sure that a given computer is online to sign a channel open or push capacity until we try. Offline nodes provide a brick-wall in the pathfinding algorithm so an alternate route must be found. If we have enough channel connectivity to be statistically sure we can route around this issue, we're in good shape. If not, we're going to have issues. Is this problem solvable? Only if the Lightning network can provide an (effectively) infinite amount of capacity... but... Problem 4: Lightning Network is not infinite. Common arguments:
BTC: Lightning network can scale infinitely so there's no problem.
Unfortunately, LN is not infinitely scalable. In fact, finding a pathway from one node to another is roughly the same problem as the traveling salesman problem.Dijkstra's algorithm which is a problem that diverges polynomially. The most efficient proposals have a difficulty bound by O(n^2). Note - in the above I confused the complexity of the traveling salesman problem with Dijkstra when they do not have the same bound. With that being said, the complexity of the LN will still diverge with size In lay terms, what that means is every time you double the size of the Lightning Network, finding an indirect LN pathway becomes 4 times as difficult and data intensive. This means that for every doubling, the amount of traffic resulting from a single request also quadruples. You can potentially temporarily mitigate traffic by bounding the number of hops taken, but that would encourage a greater channel-per-user ratio. For a famous example... the game "6 degrees of Kevin Bacon" postulates that Kevin Bacon can be connected by co-stars to any movie by 6 degrees of separation. If the game is reduced to "4 degrees of Kevin Bacon," users of this network would still want as many connections to be made, so they'd be incentivized to hire Kevin Bacon to star in everything. You'd start to see ridiculous mash-ups and reboots just to get more connectivity... Just imagine hearing Coming soon - Kevin Bacon and Adam Sandlar star in "Billy Madison 2: Replace the face." Is this problem solvable? Signs point to no. So technically, if the average computational power and network connectivity can handle the problem (the number of Lightning network channels needed to connect the world)2 in a trivial amount of time, Lightning Network is effectively infinite as the upper bound of a non-infinite earth would limit time-frames to those that are computationally feasible. With that being said, BTC has discussed Lightning dev comments before that estimated a cap of 10,000 - 1,000,000 channels before problems are encountered which is far less than the required "number of channels needed to connect the world" level. In fact SHA256 is a newer NP-hard problem than the traveling saleseman problem. That means that statistically, and based on the amount of review that has been given to each problem, it is more likely that SHA256 - the algorithm that lends security to all of bitcoin - is cracked before the traveling salesman problem is. Notions that "a dedicated dev team can suddenly solve this problem, while not technically impossible, border on statistically absurd. Edit - While the case isn't quite as bad as the traveling salesman problem, the problem will still diverge with size and finding a more efficient algorithm is nearly as unlikely. This upper bound shows that we cannot count on infinite scalability or connectivity for the lightning network. Thus, there will always be on-chain fee pressure and it will rise as the LN reaches it's computational upper-bound. Because you can't count on channel states, the on-chain fee pressure will cause typical sat/byte fees to raise. The higher this rate, the more transactions you have to make for a Lightning payment open/close operation to pay for itself. This is, of course unless it is substantially reworked or substituted for a O(log(n))-or-better solution. Finally, I'd like to add, creating an on-chain transaction is a set non-recursive, non looping function - effectively O(1), sending this transaction over a peer-to-peer network is bounded by O(log(n)) and accepting payment is, again, O(1). This means that (as far as I can tell) on-chain transactions (very likely) scale more effectively than Lightning Network in its current state. Additional notes: My computational difficulty assumptions were based on a generalized, but similar problem set for both LN and on-chain instances. I may have overlooked additional steps needed for the specific implementation, and I may have overlooked reasons a problem is a simplified version requiring reduced computational difficulty. I would appreciate review and comment on my assumptions for computational difficulty and will happily correct said assumptions if reasonable evidence is given that a problem doesn't adhere to listed computational difficulty. TL;DR: While Lightning node paymentsthemselvescost less than on-chain BCH payments, the associated overhead currently requires a LN channel to produce 16 transactions just to break-even under ideal 1sat/byte circumstances and substantially more as the fee rate goes up. Further, the Lightning network can provide no guarantee in its current state to maintain/reduce fees to 1sat/byte.
Bitcoin looks to be a great new digital currency that the whole world may someday use. However there are some odd things about bitcoin that deserve more exposure. First, Bitcoin was officially released by an unknown person who used a Japanese pseduonym, 5 days before Obama was elected. This person does not exist. Secondly, bitcoin mining is designed to solve hashes in the SHA-256 algorithm. SHA-256 is a 256-bit version of an algorithm that is used to encrypt messages sent over the internet. The NSA invented SHA-256.
As people's computers mine bitcoins, they are discovering solutions to SHA-256 hashes, which then get stored in to the blockchain, which is a digital record and repository of all activity within bitcoin to date. Each block is like one SHA-256 puzzle, that the computers try to solve. The only way to solve it is to guess the right answer randomly out of billions or trillions of choices. There is no algorithm or method to find the right solution other than guessing and then doing the computation to see if you were correct or not, due to how the algorithm is constructed (which is exactly what makes it good for security). So when computers mine for bitcoins, they are guessing solutions to that particular block's SHA-256 puzzle. When a solution is found, 50 bitcoins (now, 25, and soon to be 12.5 as dictated by the algorithm) are rewarded to the miner who found the solution. So it's a lottery of sorts. This is why people pool together to form mining pools, where the winnings are shared proportionally among everyone, weighted by their total number of attempted solutions. That helps take the luck out of it so everyone can get more reliable income. Anyway, these solutions are so hard to find that even with all the computers across the world mining for bitcoins, it still takes 10 minutes to solve just one single puzzle. This is why it's so secure. If you want to hack a system that uses SHA-256 (which is a very encryption common system to use, alongside SHA-128 which is even weaker) then hacking it difficult because you have to guess over and over to solve this large prime number problem. However, if you have a list of all the prime numbers and their solutions (including many really huge numbers that haven't been computed except for this list) then that is a speedup to cracking a particular system using SHA-256, because you don't have to run all those calculations, you can simply look them up. In the blockchain. So there is a potential the blockchain is an open distributed-computing SHA-256 solution repository, which enables hackers who know how to use it (like the NSA). With all this in mind, it's easier to see why countries are starting to accept bitcoin as a legal currency. Japan officially recognized it as currency just recently:
We know Japan is often a testing ground for US monetary policy (QE and Abenomics, for example) so this is likely to be the direction of the future, which makes it a good investment because this implies it's backed by the western central banks, which means it will probably prosper in the long term. Which is why we see so many rich people investing in it. But not so much with litecoin or etherium, which are some of the biggest competitors to bitcoin on the cryptocurrency market. You can see the largest coins by total market cap here:
Bitcoin dominates the market, being 20x the size of Litecoin. I think cryptocurrencies are great, but I think people need to be mindful of what is going on behind the scenes, and to ensure there are competing cryptocurrencies rather than a singular bitcoin monopoly that dominates the market. However it's good that one cryptocurrecy grow to prominence to establish the infrastructure of using them. I do think there is government backing because of the relationship of bitcoin to the NSA's SHA-256 algorithm. However over the next few decades, I think that algorithm will become less and less relevant as cryptography becomes more advanced, and thus bitcoin will lose government support because it will no longer be useful to the NSA. However there will likely be replacement cryptocurrencies by that time. So it seems like a short-term western global currency, but in the long term will likely have to be replaced as SHA-256 loses its relevancy, as computers become more powerful.
Evidence Points to Bitcoin being an NSA-engineered Psyop to roll out One-World Digital Currency
Eye I'm going to assume the readers who make it to this article are well informed enough that I don't have to go into the history of the global money changers and their desire for a one world currency. (If you don't yet understand the goal of the globalist banking empire and the coming engineered collapse of the fiat currency system, you're already about 5,000 posts behind the curve.) With that as a starting point, it's now becoming increasingly evident that Bitcoin may be a creation of the NSA and was rolled out as a "normalization" experiment to get the public familiar with digital currency. Once this is established, the world's fiat currencies will be obliterated in an engineered debt collapse (see below for the sequence of events), then replaced with a government approved cryptocurrency with tracking of all transactions and digital wallets by the world's western governments. NSA mathematicians detailed "digital cash" two decades ago What evidence supports this notion? First, take a look at this document entitled, "How to Make a Mint - The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash." This document, released in 1997 - yes, twenty years ago - detailed the overall structure and function of Bitcoin cryptocurrency. Who authored the document? Try not to be shocked when you learn it was authored by,
"mathematical cryptographers at the National Security Agency's Office of Information Security Research and Technology."
The NSA, in other words, detailed key elements of Bitcoin long before Bitcoin ever came into existence. Much of the Bitcoin protocol is detailed in this document, including signature authentication techniques, eliminating cryptocoin counterfeits through transaction authentication and several features that support anonymity and untraceability of transactions. The document even outlines the heightened risk of money laundering that's easily accomplished with cryptocurrencies. It also describes "secure hashing" to be "both one-way and collision-free." Although Bitcoin adds mining and a shared, peer-to-peer blockchain transaction authentication system to this structure, it's clear that the NSA was researching cryptocurrencies long before everyday users had ever heard of the term. Note, too, that the name of the person credited with founding Bitcoin is Satoshi Nakamoto, who is reputed to have reserved one million Bitcoins for himself. Millions of posts and online threads discuss the possible identity of Satishi Nakamoto, and some posts even claim the NSA has identified Satoshi. However, another likely explanation is that Satoshi Nakamotois the NSA, which means he is either working for the NSA or is a sock puppet character created by the NSA for the purpose of this whole grand experiment. The NSA also wrote the crypto hash used by Bitcoin to secure all transactions On top of the fact that the NSA authored a technical paper on cryptocurrency long before the arrival of Bitcoin, the agency is also the creator of the SHA-256 hash upon which every Bitcoin transaction in the world depends. As The Hacker News (THN) explains.
"The integrity of Bitcoin depends on a hash function called **SHA-256**, which was designed by the NSA and published by the *National Institute for Standards and Technology* ([NIST](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_of_Standards_and_Technology))."
THN also adds:
"If you assume that the NSA did something to SHA-256, which no outside researcher has detected, what you get is the ability, with credible and detectable action, they would be able to forge transactions. The really scary thing is somebody finds a way to find collisions in SHA-256 really fast without brute-forcing it or using lots of hardware and then they take control of the network."
Cryptography researcher Matthew D. Green of Johns Hopkins University said. In other words, if the SHA-256 hash, which was created by the NSA, actually has a backdoor method for cracking the encryption, it would mean the NSA could steal everybody's Bitcoins whenever it wants (call it "Zero Day.") That same article, written by Mohit Kumar, mysteriously concludes,
"Even today it's too early to come to conclusions about Bitcoin. Possibly it was designed from day one as a tool to help maintain control of the money supplies of the world."
And with that statement, Kumar has indeed stumbled upon the bigger goal in all this:
To seize control over the world money supply as the fiat currency system crumbles and is replaced with a one-world *digital currency controlled by globalists*.
"The attack allows an attacker to extract the secret crypto key from a system by analyzing the pattern of memory utilization or the electromagnetic outputs of the device that are emitted during the decryption process."
Note, importantly, that this is a 1024-bit encryption system. The same technique is also said to be able to crack 2048-bit encryption. In fact, encryption layers are cracked on a daily basis by clever hackers. Some of those encryption layers are powering various cryptocurrencies right now. Unless you are an extremely high-level mathematician, there's no way you can know for sure whether any crypto currency is truly non-hackable. In fact, every cryptocurrency becomes obsolete with the invention of large-scale quantum computing. Once China manages to build a working 256-bit quantum computer, it can effectively steal all the Bitcoins in the world (plus steal most national secrets and commit other global mayhem at will). (Video) Ten steps to crypto-tyranny - The "big plan" by the globalists (and how it involves Bitcoin) In summary, here's one possible plan by the globalists to seize total control over the world's money supply, savings, taxation and financial transactions while enslaving humanity. And it all starts with Bitcoin...
Roll out the NSA-created Bitcoin to get the public excited about a digital currency.
Quietly prepare a globalist-controlled cryptocurrency to take its place. (JP Morgan, anyone...?)
Initiate a massive, global-scale [false flag operation](http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_falseflag.htm) that crashes the global debt markets and sends fiat currencies down in flames (hoax alien invasion, hoax North Korean EMP attack, mass distributed power grid terrorism network, etc.)
Blame whatever convenient enemy is politically acceptable (North Korea, "the Russians," Little Green Men or whatever it takes…)
Allow the fiat currency debt pyramid to collapse and smolder until the sheeple get desperate.
With great fanfare, announce a government-backed cryptocurrency replacement for all fiat currencies, and position world governments as the SAVIOR of humanity. Allow the desperate public to trade in their fiat currencies for official crypto currencies.
[Outlaw cash](http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalbanking.htm#Cashless_Society) and *criminalize gold and silver ownership by private citizens*. All in the name of "security," of course.
Criminalize all non-official cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, crashing their value virtually overnight and funneling everyone into the one world government crypto, where the NSA controls the blockchain. This can easily be achieved by blaming the false flag event (see above) on some nation or group that is said to have been "funded by Bitcoin, the cryptocurrency used by terrorists."
Require [embedded RFID](http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/secret_projects/implants.htm#RFID) or biometric identifiers for all transactions in order to "authenticate" the one-world digital crypto currency activities. *Mark of the Beast* becomes reality. No one is allowed to eat, travel or earn a wage without being marked.
Once absolute control over the new one-world digital currency is achieved, weaponize the government-tracked blockchain to track all transactions, investments and commercial activities. Confiscate a portion of all crypto under the guise of "automated taxation." In an emergency, the government can even announce *negative interest rates* where your holdings automatically decrease each day.
With all this accomplished, globalists can now roll out absolute totalitarian control over every aspect of private lives by enforcing financial "blackouts" for those individuals who criticize the government. They can put in place automatic deductions for traffic violations, vehicle license plate taxes, internet taxes and a thousand other oppressive taxes invented by the bureaucracy. With automatic deductions run by the government, citizens have no means to halt the endless confiscation of their "money" by totalitarian bureaucrats and their deep state lackeys. How do you feel about your Bitcoin now...? Video by Mike Adams December 10, 2017 from NaturalNews Website Source
Bitcoin Mining Profitability: How Long Does it Take to Mine One Bitcoin in 2019?
When it comes to Bitcoin (BTC) mining, the major questions on people’s minds are “how profitable is Bitcoin mining” and “how long would it take to mine one Bitcoin?” To answer these questions, we need to take an in-depth look at the current state of the Bitcoin mining industry — and how it has changed — over the last several years. Bitcoin mining is, essentially, the process of participating in Bitcoin’s underlying security mechanism — known as proof-of-work — to help secure the Bitcoin blockchain. In return, participants receive compensation in bitcoins (BTC). When you participate in Bitcoin mining, you are essentially searching for blocks by crunching complex cryptographic challenges using your mining hardware. Once a block is discovered, new transactions are recorded and verified within the block and the block discoverer receives the block rewards — currently set at 12.5 BTC — as well as the transactions fees for the transactions included within the block. Once the maximum supply of 21 million Bitcoins has been mined, no further Bitcoins will ever come into existence. This property makes Bitcoin deflationary, something which many argue will inevitably increase the value of each Bitcoin unit as it becomes more scarce due to increased global adoption. The limited supply of Bitcoin is also one of the reasons why Bitcoin mining has become so popular. In previous years, Bitcoin mining proved to be a lucrative investment option — netting miners with several fold returns on their investment with relatively little effort. bitcoin mining hardware Mining Hardware The mining hardware you choose will mostly depend on your circumstances — in terms of budget, location and electricity costs. Since the amount of hashing power you can dedicate to the mining process is directly correlated with how much Bitcoin you will mine per day, it is wise to ensure your hardware is still competitive in 2019. Bitcoin uses SHA256 as its mining algorithm. Because of this, only hardware compatible with this algorithm can be used to mine Bitcoin. Although it is technically possible to mine Bitcoin on your current computer hardware — using your CPU or GPU — this will almost certainly not generate a positive return on your investment and you may end up damaging your device. The most cost-effective way to mine Bitcoin in 2019 is using application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) mining hardware. These are specially-designed machines that offer much higher performance per watt than typical computers and have been an absolutely essential purchase for anybody looking to get into Bitcoin mining since the first Avalon ASICs were shipped in 2013. When it comes to selecting Bitcoin mining hardware, there are several main parameters to consider — though the importance of each of these may vary based on personal circumstances and budget. Performance per Watt When it comes to Bitcoin mining, performance per watt is a measure of how many gigahashes per watt a machine is capable of and is, hence, a simple measure of its efficiency. Since electricity costs are likely to be one of the largest expenses when mining Bitcoin, it is usually a good idea to ensure that you are getting good performance per watt out of your hardware. Ideally, your mining hardware would be highly efficient, allowing it to mine Bitcoin with lower energy requirements — though this will need to be balanced with acquisition costs, as often the most efficient hardware is also the most expensive. This means it may take longer to see a return on investment. In countries with cheap electricity, performance per watt is often less of a concern than acquisition costs and price-performance ratio. In most countries, operating outdated mining hardware is typically cost prohibitive, as energy costs outweigh the income generated by the mining equipment. However, this may not be the case for those operating in countries with extremely cheap electricity — such as Kuwait and Venezuela — as even older equipment can still be profitable. Similarly, miners with a free energy surplus, such as from wind or solar electric generators, can benefit from the minimal gains offered by still running outdated hardware. Longevity The lifetime of mining hardware also plays a critical role in determining how profitable your mining venture will be. It’s always a good idea to do whatever possible to ensure it runs as smoothly as possible. Since mining equipment tends to run at a full (or almost full) load for extended periods, they also tend to break down and fail more frequently than most electronics — which can seriously damage your profitability. Equipment failure is even more common when purchasing second-hand equipment. Since warranty claims are often challenging, it can often take a long time to receive a warranty replacement. Price-Performance Ratio In many cases, one of the major criteria used to select mining hardware is the price-performance ratio — a measure of how much performance a machine outputs per unit price. In the case of cryptocurrency mining hardware, this is commonly expressed as gigahashes per dollar or GH/$. Under ideal circumstances, the mining hardware would have a high price-performance ratio, ensuring you get a lot of bang for your buck. However, this must also be considered in combination with the acquisition costs and the expected lifetime of the machine — since the absolute most powerful machines are not always the cheapest or the most energy efficient. Acquisition Costs Acquisition costs are almost always the biggest barrier to entry for most Bitcoin miners since most top-end mining hardware costs several thousand dollars. This problem is further compounded by the fact that many hardware manufacturers offer discounts for bulk purchases, allowing those with deeper pockets to achieve a better price-performance ratio. Acquisition costs include all the costs involved in purchasing any mining equipment, including hardware costs, shipping costs, import duties, and any further costs. For example, many ASIC miners do not include a power supply — which can be another considerable expense, since the 1,000W+ power supplies usually required tend to cost several hundred dollars alone. Ensuring your equipment runs smoothly can also add in additional costs, such as cooling and maintenance expenses. In addition, some miners may want to invest in uninterruptible power supplies to ensure their hardware keeps running — even if the power fails temporarily. asic mining Current Generation Hardware One of the most recent additions to the Bitcoin mining hardware market is the Ebang Ebit E11++, which was released in October 2018. Using a 10nm fabrication process for its processors, the Ebit E11++ is able to achieve one of the highest hash rates on the market at 44TH/s. In terms of efficiency, the Ebang Ebit E11++ is arguably the best on the market, offering 44TH/s of hash rate while drawing just 1,980W of power, offering 22.2GH/W performance. However, as of writing, the Ebang Ebit E11++ is out of stock until March 31, 2019 — while its price of $2,024 (excluding shipping) may make it prohibitively expensive for those first getting involved with Bitcoin mining. Another popular choice is the ASICminer 8 Nano, a machine released in October 2018 that offers 44TH/s for $3,900 excluding shipping. The ASICminer 8 Nano draws 2,100W of power, giving it an efficiency of almost 21GH/W — slightly lower than the Ebit E11++ while costing almost double the price. However, unlike the E11++, the 8 Nano is actually in stock and available to purchase. ASICminer also offers the 8 Nano Pro, a machine launched in mid-2018 that offers 80 TH/s of hash rate for $9,500 (excluding shipping). However, unlike the Ebit E11++ and 8 Nano, the minimum order quantity for the 8 Nano Pro is curiously set at five, meaning you will need to lay out a minimum of $47,500 in order to actually get your hands on one (or five). While the 8 Nano Pro doesn’t offer the same performance per watt as the Ebit E11+ or AICMiner 8 Nano, it is one of the quieter miners on this list, making it more suitable for a home or office environment. That being said, the ASICminer 8 Nano Pro is easily the most expensive miner per TH on this list — costing a whopping $118.75/TH, compared to the $46/TH offered by the E11++ and $88.64 offered by the 8 Nano. The latest hardware on this list is the Innosilicon T3 43T, which is currently available for pre-order at $2,279, and estimated to ship in March 2019. Offering 43TH/s of performance at 2,100W, the T3 43T comes in at an efficiency of 20.4GH/W, which is around 10 percent less energy efficient than the Ebit E11++. The T3 43T also has a minimum order quantity of three units, making the minimum acquisition cost $6837 + shipping for preorders. All in all, the T3 43T is more costly and less efficient than the E11++ but may arrive slightly earlier since Ebang will not ship the E11++ units until at least end March 29, 2019. Finally, this list would not be complete without including Bitmain’s latest offering, the Antminer S15-28TH/s, which — as its name suggests — offers 28TH/s of hash power while drawing just under 1600W at the wall. The Antminer S15 is one of the only SHA256 miners to use 7nm processors, making it somewhat smaller than some of the other devices on this list. Like most pieces of top-end Bitcoin mining hardware, the Antminer S15 27TH/s model is currently sold out, with current orders not shipping until mid-February 2019. However, the S15 is offered at a significantly lower price than many of its competitors at just $1020 (excluding shipping), with no minimum quantity restriction. At these rates, the Antminer comes in at just $37.78/TH — though its energy efficiency is a much less impressive 17.5GH/W. Mining Hardware Mining Hardware Comparison Performance (GH/W) Price Performance Ratio ($/TH) Ebang Ebit E11++ 22.2GH/W $46/TH ASICminer 8 Nano 21GH/W $88.64/TH ASICminer 8 Nano Pro 19GH/W $118.75/TH Innosilicon T3 43T 20.4GH/W $53/TH Antminer S15-28TH/s 17.5GH/W $37.78/TH How To Select a Good Mining Pool Mining pools are platforms that allow miners to pool their resources together to achieve a higher collective hash rate — which, in turn, allows the collective to mine more blocks than they would be able to achieve alone. Typically, these mining pools will distribute block rewards to contributing miners based on the proportion of the hash rate they supply. If a pool contributing a total of 20 TH/s of hash rate successfully mines the next block, a user responsible for 10 percent of this hash rate will receive 10 percent of the 12.5 BTC reward. Pools essentially allow smaller miners to compete with large private mining organizations by ensuring that the collective hash rate is high enough to successfully mine blocks on regular basis. Without operating through a mining pool, many miners would be unlikely to discover any blocks at all — due to only contributing a tiny fraction of the overall Bitcoin hash rate. While it is quite possible to be successful mining without a pool, this typically requires an extremely large mining operation and is usually not recommended — unless you have enough hash rate to mine blocks on a regular basis. Although it is technically possible to discover blocks mining solo and keep the entire 12.5 BTC reward for yourself, the odds of this actually occurring are practically zero — making pool collaboration practically the only way to compete in 2019 and beyond. Selecting the best pool for you can be a challenging job since the vast majority of pools are quite similar and offer similar features and comparable fees. Because of this, we have broken down the qualities you should be looking for in a new pool into four categories; reputation, hash rate, pool fees, and usability/features: Reputation The reputation of a pool is one of the most important factors in selecting the pool that is best for you. Well-reputed pools will tend to be much larger than newer or less well-established pools since few pools with a poor reputation can stand the test of time. Well-reputed pools also tend to be more transparent about their operation, many of which provide tools to ensure that each user is getting the correct reward based on the hash rate contributed. By using only pools with a great reputation, you also ensure your hash rate is not being used for nefarious purposes — such as powering a 51 percent attack. When comparing a list of pools that appear suitable for you, it is a wise move to read their user reviews before making your choice — ensuring you don’t end up mining at a pool that steals your hard-fought earnings. Hash Rate When it comes to mining Bitcoin, the probability of discovering the next block is directly related to the amount of hashing power you contribute to the network. Because of this, one of the major features you should be considering when selecting your pool is its total hash rate — which is often closely related to the proportion of new blocks mined by the pool Since the total hash rate of a pool is directly related to how quickly it discovers new blocks, this means the largest pools tend to discover a relative majority of blocks — leading to more regular rewards. However, the very largest pools also tend the have higher fees but often make up for this with sheer success and additional features. Sometimes, some of the largest pools have a minimum hash rate requirement ù leaving some of the smaller miners left out of the loop. Although smaller pools typically have more relaxed requirements with reduced performance thresholds, these pools may be only slightly more profitable than mining solo. Pool Fees When choosing a suitable pool, typically one of the major considerations is its fees. Typically, most pools will charge a small fee that is deducted from your earnings and is usually around 1-2 percent — but sometimes slightly lower or higher. There are also pools that offer 0 percent fees. However, these are often much smaller than the major pools and tend to make their money in a different way — such as through monthly subscriptions or donations. Ideally, you will choose the pool that offers the best balance of fees to other features. Usually, the pool with the absolute lowest fees is not the best choice. Additionally, pools with the lowest fees often have the highest withdrawal minimums — making pool hopping uneconomical for most. Usability and Features When first starting out with Bitcoin mining, learning how to set up a pool and navigating through the settings can be a challenge. Because of this, several pools target their services to newer users by offering a simple to navigate user interface and providing detailed learning resources and prompt customer support. However, for more experienced miners, simple pools don’t tend to offer a variety of features needed to maximize profitability. For example, although many mining pools focus their entire hash rate towards mining a single cryptocurrency, some are large enough to offer additional options — allowing users to mine other SHA256 coins such as Bitcoin Cash (BCH) or Fantom if they choose. These pools are technically more challenging to use and mostly designed for those familiar with mining, happy to hop from coin to coin mining whichever is most profitable at the time. There are even some exchanges that automatically direct their combined hash rate at the most profitable cryptocurrency — taking the guesswork out of the equation. bitcoin mining pool Best Mining Pools for 2019 The Bitcoin mining pool industry has a large number of players, but the vast majority of the Bitcoin hash rate is concentrated within just a few pools. Currently, there are dozens of suitable pools to choose from — but we have selected just a few of the best to help get you started on your journey. Slushpool was the first Bitcoin mining pool released, being launched way back in 2010 under the name “Bitcoin Pooled Mining Server.” Since then, Slushpool has grown into one of the most popular pools around — currently accounting for just under 10 percent of the total Bitcoin hash rate. Although Slushpool isn’t one of the very largest pools, it does offer a newbie-friendly interface alongside more advanced features for those that need them. The pool has moderately high fees of 2 percent but offers servers in several countries — including the U.S., Europe, China, and Japan — giving it a good balance of fees to features. BTC.com is another potential candidate for your pool and currently stands as the largest public Bitcoin mining pool. It is responsible for mining around 17 percent of new blocks. Being the largest public mining pool provides users with a sense of security, ensuring blocks are mined regularly and a stable income is made. Image courtesy of Blockchain.info. BTC.com is owned by Bitmain, a company that manufacturers mining hardware, and charges a 1.5 percent fees — placing it squarely in the middle-tier in terms of fees. Unlike other platforms, BTC.com uses its own payment structure known as FPPS (Full Pay Per Share), which means miners also receive a share of the transaction fees included within mined blocks — making it slightly more profitable than standard payment per share (PPS) pools. Another great option is Antpool, a mining pool that supports mining services for 10 different cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Litecoin (LTC) and Ethereum (ETH). AntPool frequently trades places with BTC.com as the largest Bitcoin mining pool. However, as of this writing, it occupies the title of the third-largest public mining pool. What sets Antpool apart from other pools is the ability to choose your own fee system — including PPS, PPS+, and PPLNS. If you choose PPLNS, using Antpool is free but you will not receive any transaction fees from any blocks mined. Antpool also offers regular payouts and has a low minimum payout of just 0.001 BTC, making it suitable for smaller miners. Last on the list of the best Bitcoin mining pools in 2019 is the Bitcoin.com mining pool. Although this is one of the smaller pools available, the Bitcoin.com pool has some redeeming features that make it worth a look. It offers mining contracts, allowing you to test out Bitcoin mining before investing in mining equipment of your own. According to Bitcoin.com, they are the highest paying Pay Per Share (PPS) pool in the world, offering up to 98 percent block rewards as well as automatic switching between BTC and BCH mining to optimize profitability. Electricity Costs While your mining hardware is most important when it comes to how much BTC you can earn when mining, your electricity costs are usually the largest additional expense. With electricity costs often varying dramatically between countries, ensuring you are on the best cost-per-KWh plan available will help to keep costs down when mining. Most commonly, large mining operations will be set up in countries where electricity costs are the lowest — such as Iceland, India, and Ukraine. Since China has one of the lowest energy costs in the world, it was previously the epicenter of Bitcoin mining. However, since the government began cracking down on cryptocurrencies, it has largely fallen out of favor with miners. Technically, Venezuela is one of the cheapest countries in the world in terms of electricity, with the government heavily subsidizing these energy costs — while Bitcoin offers an escape from the hyperinflation suffered by the Venezuelan bolivar. Despite this, importing mining hardware into the country is a costly endeavor, making it impractical for many people. Finding ways to lower your electricity costs is one of the best ways to improve your mining profitability. This can include investing in renewable energy sources such as solar, geothermal, or wind — which can yield increased profitability over the long term. if you are looking to buy bitcoin mining equipment here is some links: Model Antminer S17 Pro (56Th) from Bitmain mining SHA-256 algorithm with a maximum hashrate of 56Th/s for a power consumption of 2385W. https://miningwholesale.eu/product/bitmain-antminer-s17-pro-56th-copy/?wpam_id=17 Model Antminer S9K from Bitmain mining SHA-256 algorithm with a maximum hashrate of 14Th/s for a power consumption of 1323W. https://miningwholesale.eu/product/bitmain-antminer-s9k-14-th-s/?wpam_id=17 Model T2T 30Tfrom Innosilicon mining SHA-256 algorithm with a maximum hashrate of 30Th/s for a power consumption of 2200W. https://miningwholesale.eu/product/innosilicon-t2t-30t/?wpam_id=17 mining wholesale website: https://miningwholesale.eu/?wpam_id=17
It seems that sha256 is becoming more and more used in order to replace the old md5 hash function. I think that sha256 is actually the best replacement because of its good balance between online storage size and security. As the others cryptographic functions of its "family", Sha-256 is unilateral so you can't find the plaintext with only the hash. You have to compare this hash to a online ... All ASIC for Bitcoin do a double SHA256 hash on an arbitrary string. But maybe they might be used for pen testing :-) Lets assume we have single SHA256 hash we want to crack. We also have an ASIC ... If SHA256 is cracked we will all have much bigger worries to deal with than what hashing function Bitcoin uses. Whatever the rest of the now royally fucked online world switches to will probably be the same that Bitcoin switches to, for practical reasons. From my understanding, a hash function is an algorithm that takes a unique input and produces a unique output, and a secure hash like SHA-256 cannot be reverse engineered. I saw this thread Won't If people demand bitcoin, the price goes up, mining increases, the task of finding a valid pre-image becomes harder, and the harder it is for anyone else to rearrange the ledger and then come up with a competing partial pre-image crack to validate their accounting fraud. The network depends on the currency, and the currency depends on the network.
How We Created the First SHA-1 Collision and What it Means for Hash Security - Duration: 43:11. Black Hat 10,194 views This is Hack Jack. In this video you will know how to calculate SHA-256 hash, also about what is it and additionally how to by-pass evilzone.org register ver... This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Crack, decrypt Hash with Hashess (Windows 7/8/8.1/10) bruteforce (Dictionary file) MD5-SHA1-SHA-256 - Duration: 3:06. t3st3r z0e 9,769 views "HOW to Decrypt PASSWORDS(encrypted in functions like MD5,SHA256,SHA512..etc) in Kali-Linux" Using HASHCAT TOOLS. md5 hash link: http://www.md5.cz/ sha512 ha...