Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Is 32bit blinding factor is enough to avoid the possibility of UTXO brute forcing? #33

Closed
UkolovaOlga opened this issue Jun 28, 2020 · 1 comment
Closed

Is 32bit blinding factor is enough to avoid the possibility of UTXO brute forcing? #33

UkolovaOlga opened this issue Jun 28, 2020 · 1 comment
Labels
[CSV] Client-side validation-related specs
Projects
Development Calls Agenda
Milestone
CSV

Comments

@UkolovaOlga
Copy link
Member

Some computers can do 23GH/sec of SHA256 which would potentially take it around 1h to break in atm.

Possible solution

Switch to 48bits and have additional 4 bytes per outpoint.

Raised during the dev call on June 24th, 2020
@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky transferred this issue from LNP-BP/devcalls Jul 12, 2020
@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky mentioned this issue Jul 12, 2020
Closed
@dr-orlovsky
Copy link
Member

Closed with LNP-BP/rust-lnpbp#52

@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky moved this from Accepted to Implemented / Done in Development Calls Agenda Aug 19, 2020
@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky added this to the CSV: drafts milestone Sep 15, 2020
@dr-orlovsky dr-orlovsky added the [CSV] Client-side validation-related specs label Sep 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
[CSV] Client-side validation-related specs
Projects
No open projects
Development Calls Agenda
  
Implemented / Done
Milestone
CSV
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@dr-orlovsky @UkolovaOlga