Giter Club home page Giter Club logo

Comments (5)

kaykurokawa avatar kaykurokawa commented on August 25, 2024 1

They are both as secure as it needs to be for the application.
Changing it would be a pointless hardfork and engineering effort.

from torba.

eukreign avatar eukreign commented on August 25, 2024 1

To add some clarification to this: I think @ocornoc was specifically referring to how the wallet is encrypted on disk and not necessarily what SHA was used for the blockchain itself.

My answer is the same as Kay's though: Bitcoin and LBRY use SHA256 to secure the blockchain. If there is a valid argument that SHA256 is not secure then it seems that fixing the blockchain would be significantly higher priority than how you encrypt your wallet.

Also, torba intends to be at least somewhat backwards compatible with electrum; there are many existing wallets with encrypted seeds/keys via the old electrum wallet which now need to be decrypted with torba. Changing how encryption works would require tracking which version of the algorithm was used to encrypt the wallet and then decrypting it with the correct decrypt algorithm. For a long time, both the 256 and 512 versions would be included in the code to be able to open old wallets; this would add unnecessary technical debt.

If SHA256 is not secure then we have much bigger problems on our hands.

from torba.

alyssaoc avatar alyssaoc commented on August 25, 2024

@eukreign Can you please triage?

from torba.

finer9 avatar finer9 commented on August 25, 2024

I would suggest @jackrobison and @kaykurokawa check this one out

from torba.

ocornoc avatar ocornoc commented on August 25, 2024

@eukreign is correct in the interpretation: I was specifically referring to torba's on-disk encryption.

And, eukreign, you are right (if I'm picking up on what you were saying correctly): SHA-256 is secure, and there may be reasons to keep SHA-256 in use whether or not it is optimally secure, such as backwards compatibility.

As an explanation of my original post, I had meant that SHA-256 is a secure hashing algorithm, though it may not be the most secure hashing algorithm readily available. I was attempting to provide reasons as to how truncated SHA-512 may be more secure than SHA-256, irregardless as to whether either of them were secure themselves.

from torba.

Related Issues (14)

Recommend Projects

  • React photo React

    A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.

  • Vue.js photo Vue.js

    🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.

  • Typescript photo Typescript

    TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.

  • TensorFlow photo TensorFlow

    An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone

  • Django photo Django

    The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

  • D3 photo D3

    Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉

Recommend Topics

  • javascript

    JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.

  • web

    Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.

  • server

    A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.

  • Machine learning

    Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.

  • Game

    Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.

Recommend Org

  • Facebook photo Facebook

    We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.

  • Microsoft photo Microsoft

    Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.

  • Google photo Google

    Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.

  • D3 photo D3

    Data-Driven Documents codes.