public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steve Davis <steven.charles.davis@gmail.com>
To: Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] SHA1 collisions make Git vulnerable to attakcs by third-parties, not just repo maintainers
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2017 15:34:33 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FE38F6A-0560-4989-9C53-7F8C94EA4C76@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGLBAhdCb+QLWRm4FWkPvaM2sU24HuafdgNiS=wgnPTGzrW05w@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3961 bytes --]

Yea, well. I don’t think it is ethical to post instructions without an associated remediation (BIP) if you don’t see the potential attack.

I was rather hoping that we could have a fuller discussion of what the best practical response would be to such an issue?


> On Feb 25, 2017, at 3:21 PM, Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com> wrote:
> 
> I was under the impression that RIPEMD160(SHA256(msg)) is used to turn a PUBLIC key (msg) into a bitcoin address, so yeah, you could identify ANOTHER (or the same, I guess - how would you know?) public key that has the same bitcoin address if RIPEMD-160 collisions are easy, but I don't see how that has any effect on anyone.  Maybe I'm restating what Peter wrote.  If so, confirmation would be nice.
> 
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 03:53:12PM -0500, Russell O'Connor wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:10:02AM -0500, Ethan Heilman via bitcoin-dev
> > > wrote:
> > > > >SHA1 is insecure because the SHA1 algorithm is insecure, not because
> > > > 160bits isn't enough.
> > > >
> > > > I would argue that 160-bits isn't enough for collision resistance.
> > > Assuming
> > > > RIPEMD-160(SHA-256(msg)) has no flaws (i.e. is a random oracle),
> > > collisions
> > >
> > > That's something that we're well aware of; there have been a few
> > > discussions on
> > > this list about how P2SH's 160-bits is insufficient in certain use-cases
> > > such
> > > as multisig.
> > >
> > > However, remember that a 160-bit *security level* is sufficient, and
> > > RIPEMD160
> > > has 160-bit security against preimage attacks. Thus things like
> > > pay-to-pubkey-hash are perfectly secure: sure you could generate two
> > > pubkeys
> > > that have the same RIPEMD160(SHA256()) digest, but if someone does that it
> > > doesn't cause the Bitcoin network itself any harm, and doing so is
> > > something
> > > you choose to do to yourself.
> > >
> >
> > Be aware that the issue is more problematic for more complex contracts.
> > For example, you are building a P2SH 2-of-2 multisig together with someone
> > else if you are not careful, party A can hand their key over to party B,
> > who can may try to generate a collision between their second key and
> > another 2-of-2 multisig where they control both keys. See
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-January/012205.html <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-January/012205.html>
> 
> I'm very aware of that, in fact I think I may have even been the first person
> to post on this list the commit-reveal mitigation.
> 
> Note how I said earlier in the message you're replying to that "P2SH's 160-bits
> is insufficient in certain use-cases such as multisig"
> 
> --
> https://petertodd.org <https://petertodd.org/> 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org <http://petertodd.org/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a techie?  
> I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com/> and Meme Racing <http://www.memeracing.net/> (in alpha). 
> I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com/> which now accepts Bitcoin.
> I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
> "He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi Nakamoto


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6406 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-25 21:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <mailman.22137.1487974823.31141.bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
2017-02-24 23:49 ` [bitcoin-dev] SHA1 collisions make Git vulnerable to attakcs by third-parties, not just repo maintainers Steve Davis
2017-02-25  1:01   ` Peter Todd
2017-02-25 12:04     ` Steve Davis
2017-02-25 14:50       ` Leandro Coutinho
2017-02-25 16:10         ` Ethan Heilman
2017-02-25 17:45           ` Shin'ichiro Matsuo
2017-02-27  9:15             ` Henning Kopp
2017-02-25 18:19           ` Alice Wonder
2017-02-25 18:36             ` Ethan Heilman
2017-02-25 19:12           ` Peter Todd
2017-02-25 20:42             ` Watson Ladd
2017-02-25 20:57               ` Peter Todd
2017-02-25 20:53             ` Russell O'Connor
2017-02-25 21:04               ` Peter Todd
2017-02-25 21:21                 ` Dave Scotese
2017-02-25 21:34                   ` Steve Davis [this message]
2017-02-25 21:40                     ` Peter Todd
2017-02-25 21:54                       ` Steve Davis
2017-02-25 22:14                         ` Pieter Wuille
2017-02-25 22:34                           ` Ethan Heilman
2017-02-26  6:26                           ` Steve Davis
2017-02-26  6:36                             ` Pieter Wuille
2017-02-26  7:16                               ` Steve Davis
     [not found]                                 ` <CAPg+sBirowtHqUT5GUJf9hmDEACKVX19HAon-rrz7GmO8OBsNg@mail.gmail.com>
2017-02-26 16:53                                   ` Steve Davis
2017-02-25 23:09                       ` Leandro Coutinho
2017-02-23 18:14 Peter Todd
2017-02-23 21:28 ` Peter Todd
2017-02-23 23:57   ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-02-24 10:04     ` Tim Ruffing
2017-02-24 15:18       ` Aymeric Vitte
2017-02-24 16:30         ` Tim Ruffing
2017-02-24 17:29           ` Aymeric Vitte

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4FE38F6A-0560-4989-9C53-7F8C94EA4C76@gmail.com \
    --to=steven.charles.davis@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=dscotese@litmocracy.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox