Worried that Bitcoin can be hacked to be double-spent/inflated? Don't be...

[muh_roads]

An image to put things into perspective and describe how this is not possible...

[brandon]

WHy does the document use quote symbols but not attribute the quotes to anyone?


Anyway, I'm nearly certain that in due time this will be proven incorrect. How would large scale practical quantum computing effect this? I don't know the answer. I'm gonna go do some reading.

[TheTexan]

It's always possible that someone will crack the encryption algorithm, or find weaknesses that reduce its strength that allow it to be brute forced.

So it's not 100% secure. It's still pretty damn secure though.

[muh_roads]

It's always possible that someone will crack the encryption algorithm, or find weaknesses that reduce its strength that allow it to be brute forced.

So it's not 100% secure. It's still pretty damn secure though.

Understand what you are saying when you say brute force. On a single computer? Sure. But on a P2P network that also has to outpace the strength of the network?...where each computer throughout the world contributing to the network has its own prevention methods?

This is what I tried to describe in the other ongoing thread.

"The power consumption requirement to attack the network itself doesn't exist. It is physics. The day AES 256 encryption can be broken for that entire network of computers is the day the community will agree to increase the encryption security to a new protocol anyway. Bitcoin isn't owned by some sort of Bitcoin, Inc company and it doesn't reside on some central computer somewhere waiting to get hacked and I think that is what you are misunderstanding. It is open-source P2P."

That should make the image above a lot more clear.

[ItsTime]

Bitcoin was already hacked for $500,000 worth. It has been proven that exchanges can be hacked. It has happened twice now. What do you think will happen when bankers see bitcoin as a threat?


Edit: I should add I am for bitcoin.

[muh_roads]

Bitcoin was already hacked for $500,000 worth. It has been proven that exchanges can be hacked. It has happened twice now. What do you think will happen when bankers see bitcoin as a threat?

Edit: I should add I am for bitcoin.

Incorrect by a factor greater than the image above.

Exchanges are central servers. They are services. Yes services and personal accounts can be hacked. But not the P2P Bitcoin network itself.

People that hold Bitcoins in online wallets without secondary authentication on their smartphones deserve to be hacked IMO.

Everybody talks about wanting a deregulated currency. Well if people actually want to play that game, people should put on their big boy pants understand what that actually means. If you get robbed there is no FDIC to print more and save you.

[ItsTime]

Incorrect by a factor greater than the image above.

Exchanges are central servers. They are services. Yes services and personal accounts can be hacked. But not the network itself.

And you don't think bankers, when they feel threatened, will attack all the exchanges in a single day?

[TheTexan]

Understand what you are saying when you say brute force. On a single computer? Sure. But on a P2P network that also has to outpace the strength of the network?...where each computer throughout the world contributing to the network has its own prevention methods?

This is what I tried to describe in the other ongoing thread.

"The power consumption requirement to attack the network itself doesn't exist. It is physics. The day AES 256 encryption can be broken for that entire network of computers is the day the community will agree to increase the encryption security to a new protocol anyway. Bitcoin isn't owned by some sort of Bitcoin, Inc company and it doesn't reside on some central computer somewhere waiting to get hacked and I think that is what you are misunderstanding. It is open-source P2P."

That should make the image above a lot more clear.

I think you missed my point. 2^256, at that strength, is certainly unassailable from a pure brute force attack vector. However, as has happened to encryption algorithms in the past, it is entirely possible that weaknesses in the algorithm reduce its strength from 2^256 to a more manageable key length, say 2^64. Then it becomes possible to brute force it.

The strength of an encryption algorithm relies not only on the number of bits, but also on the strength of the algorithm itself.

[psi2941]

It's always possible that someone will crack the encryption algorithm, or find weaknesses that reduce its strength that allow it to be brute forced.

So it's not 100% secure. It's still pretty damn secure though.

I agree with you 100%. I'm sure its pretty secured but to say it will never be broken or exploited its just wrong.


I got an idea! What if the federal government seizes all of the exchanges assets and accounts what happens then? All these exchanges have a checking accounts to back the exchange. What if the government freezes all those accounts and raids the datacenters at the same time.

and just don't go after the citizens just all the exchanges.

[ItsTime]

I agree with you 100%. I'm sure its pretty secured but to say it will never be broken or exploited its just wrong.


I got an idea! What if the federal government seizes all of the exchanges assets and accounts what happens then? All these exchanges have a checking accounts to back the exchange. What if the government freezes all those accounts and raids the datacenters at the same time.

and just don't go after the citizens just all the exchanges.

Which is EASILY done.

[talkingpointes]

What is there to use brute force on? It's an algorithm that configures hash numbers.

[jcannon98188]

I agree with you 100%. I'm sure its pretty secured but to say it will never be broken or exploited its just wrong.


I got an idea! What if the federal government seizes all of the exchanges assets and accounts what happens then? All these exchanges have a checking accounts to back the exchange. What if the government freezes all those accounts and raids the datacenters at the same time.

and just don't go after the citizens just all the exchanges.

Not all Exchanges are set in the United States. And besides, if the Govt does that, then that means some serious ish is about to go down. The more likely scenario is the government will simply shutdown the internet within the United States.

[psi2941]

Which is EASILY done.

LOL the more i think about the more i'm sure thats how its going to happen. they will use the false flag pretense and say their going after those "tax evaders" or "drug dealers"

Not all Exchanges are set in the United States. And besides, if the Govt does that, then that means some serious ish is about to go down. The more likely scenario is the government will simply shutdown the internet within the United States.

its sad that the US government can do this, but they can freeze accounts in other countries and I know they have done this. Unless your exchange is in North Korea or Iran the exchange's checking accounts can be frozen. Like i said, they can do this under the cover of drug money or tax evaders. if they got the Swiss to abandon their years of banking tradition by coughing up those rich clients, i'm sure other countries don't stand a chance.

Then obviously all the exchanges being frozen, people are going to have a hard time switching from bitcoin to gold or FRN creating a sudden panic causing people to have a sharp exit causing the devalue of the bitcoin. Then some bogus company owned by the US government just buys them all up until they hit 51% and bam, they control it.

[muh_roads]

And you don't think bankers, when they feel threatened, will attack all the exchanges in a single day?

And what is the goal of that? To make the price invisible for a day or two until they come back online elsewhere? I agree that could do some funky stuff to the spot price for a short period of time. But it would just result in more and more exchanges popping up everywhere like bit torrent sites.

You can't put a stop to Bitcoin itself, current circulation, future circulation, or the ability for users to trade between each other, ever, unless they completely shut the internet down for everyone around the world. Good luck with that.

[muh_roads]

What is there to use brute force on? It's an algorithm that configures hash numbers.

Basically, yeah, you win the thread. The naysayers in here are more concerned with peoples passwords getting hacked. Which sadly...will continue, yes.

This is starting to get technical. The only real way to put a stop to transactions is to "51% the network". Meaning a single entity has to own a majority of the hashing power.

But this would only last for a few days probably...maybe for just a few hours until a new version is made public. Bitcoin has the ability to trace such an attack back to the source on the blockchain, I think... Or isolate ASIC miners, or ban ASIC mining altogether...one of those options. At which point miners would roll back to GPU's and FPGA's at worst case scenario.

hazek knows more about this.

Anyway...The next version of Bitcoin that gets developed then (currently version 0.8) which the worldwide community accepts with each new version after scrutinizing the open-source changes, would accept these changes with their systems...and things would continue as usual.

The only real way to put a stop to Bitcoin is to shut down the internet worldwide. And that would cause riots among everyone...not just libertarians. Considering how much of the job market requires the internet now, that $#@! wouldn't be pretty. They can't do that and they won't.

[muh_roads]

I agree with you 100%. I'm sure its pretty secured but to say it will never be broken or exploited its just wrong.


I got an idea! What if the federal government seizes all of the exchanges assets and accounts what happens then? All these exchanges have a checking accounts to back the exchange. What if the government freezes all those accounts and raids the datacenters at the same time.

and just don't go after the citizens just all the exchanges.

How could they sieze my assets if I don't have my assets with them?

I have a private key on cold storage in a computer that never touches the internet. The same way I also believe in only owning physical metal.

When I want to spend the btc, I withdraw on a USB stick and bring it to a PC with my public key. When I receive a deposit to my public key, I then do the same thing in reverse to add it to my total to the offline private key.

If my computer crashes or gets stolen I use my paper wallet to transfer funds to another computer quickly. And any important files on that hard drive is encrypted. I will have the funds safely transferred already before my offline PC can be brute forced. And I use a very complex password.

http://howsecureismypassword.net/

Christ...lol

Why not ask questions instead of attacking? You clearly keep demonstrating how little you understand Bitcoin more and more. It is okay. You aren't alone. This is what forums are for. Squelching misconceptions and spreading info.

[muh_roads]

Its sad that the US government can do this, but they can freeze accounts in other countries and I know they have done this. Unless your exchange is in North Korea or Iran the exchange's checking accounts can be frozen. Like i said, they can do this under the cover of drug money or tax evaders. if they got the Swiss to abandon their years of banking tradition by coughing up those rich clients, i'm sure other countries don't stand a chance.

How can they freeze what they don't have access to? Sure some could get screwed. That would just deflate the circulation more if they did and spike the price for those still holding their btc in a much more secure manner.

Then obviously all the exchanges being frozen, people are going to have a hard time switching from bitcoin to gold or FRN creating a sudden panic causing people to have a sharp exit causing the devalue of the bitcoin. Then some bogus company owned by the US government just buys them all up until they hit 51% and bam, they control it.

That isn't what a 51% attack means.

[Tod]

I'm more concerned that I'll lose internet access.

[muh_roads]

I'm more concerned that I'll lose internet access.

Then use your neighbors computer or your smartphone.

[Barrex]

Find a guy with a key...

[muh_roads]

The more I think about this the more I believe I want all the centralized ETF's shut down.

I think a ton of websites like this would pop up everywhere like bit torrent sites... https://ripple.com/

People could then directly send to each other in a more visible way and set their own prices.

[NoOneButPaul]

My bigger fear is the feds shutting it down, which I think is on the not too distant horizon.

[muh_roads]

My bigger fear is the feds shutting it down, which I think is on the not too distant horizon.

They can't. It isn't centralized. Transactions are incredibly tiny. That is why it is called a bit. A fraction of a byte. Think of downloading a movie as a bucket of water. Transactions are exponentially smaller...smaller than the smallest water droplet from the same bucket. The hashed algorithms are sent every which way all over the place.

If governments try to own 51% of the hashing power there are already contingency plans to easily prevent against it.

[Jordan]

I understand some of these words...

Anyway, bitcoin is obviously safe. Any rational person who could crack bitcoin could make far more money/influence/whatever with another payment processor. Bitcoin wouldn't even be on the radar when there are payment networks that actually matter, like Visa or American Express.

[psi2941]

The more I think about this the more I believe I want all the centralized ETF's shut down.

I think a ton of websites like this would pop up everywhere like bit torrent sites... https://ripple.com/

People could then directly send to each other in a more visible way and set their own prices.

to be fair, thats the same level as attacking all the gold dealers/comex in the US but you get the idea, there will aways be an exploit the government can take advantage of.

[TheTexan]

to be fair, thats the same level as attacking all the gold dealers/comex in the US but you get the idea, there will aways be an exploit the government can take advantage of.

and there will always be a black market in the event of such occurrence

[muh_roads]

to be fair, thats the same level as attacking all the gold dealers/comex in the US but you get the idea, there will aways be an exploit the government can take advantage of.

Metal is far more exposed to such stuff because it is heavy. Its intrinsic nature that you only seem to be concerned about will be a major hindrance in our modern world and will only be valuable locally for in-person transactions. e-commerce will still continue in the new age. Bitcoin is instant and can be paid to anyone anywhere in the world.

Eventually paper money is going to become so worthless that people won't even care about their exchange rate anymore and Bitcoins will eventually just stay as Bitcoins as people pay each other. Same for metals locally. Individuals setting their own prices is going to be a beautiful thing IMO.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

IF...

I had money to invest, sure, I would invest some in bitcoins. But from listening to other interviews with really techy-bitcoin people (which I am not) even they worry about a possible break in of the system. It's not impossible.