[148584] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] BitCoin Question - This may not be the best
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Weis)
Sun Dec 22 16:54:07 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
In-Reply-To: <E5D7710E-83F1-405E-8804-73202FEECF9B@gmail.com>
From: Steve Weis <steveweis@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 13:50:02 -0800
To: Robert Christian <robertjchristian@gmail.com>
Cc: cryptography <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 5:45 PM, Robert Christian
<robertjchristian@gmail.com> wrote:
> What=92s to stop someone from gaming the system and creating millions of =
wallets, increasing their odds of accidental deposits? If nothing else you=
could conceive of a DOS attack of sorts, where the addresses are all burne=
d up. This seems like a major flaw to me.
Bitcoin addresses are hashes of ECDSA key pairs:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Technical_background_of_Bitcoin_addresses
If by "burning up" addresses you mean generating every key pair and
storing it, that's not going to be feasible since Bitcoin uses
Secp256k1 with 256-bit private keys.
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
