[bitcoin-dev] SHA1 collisions make Git vulnerable to attakcs by third-parties, not just repo maintainers

Ethan Heilman eth3rs at gmail.com
Sat Feb 25 22:34:38 UTC 2017

I strongly encourage Bitcoin to move from 80-bit collision resistance
(RIPEMD-160) to 128-bit collision resistance (SHA-256).

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Feb 25, 2017 14:09, "Steve Davis via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev at lists.
> linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> I really, really don’t want to get into it but segwit has many aspects
> that are less appealing, not least of which being the amount of time it
> would take to reach the critical mass.
> Surely there's a number of alternative approaches which could be explored,
> even if only to make a fair assessment of a best response?
> Any alternative to move us away from RIPEMD160 would require:
> * A drafting of a softfork proposal, implementation, testing, review.
> * A new address format
> * Miners accepting the new consensus rules
> * Wallets adopting the new address format, both on the sender side and
> receiver side (which requires new signatures).
> I.e., exactly the same as segwit, for which most of these are already
> done. And it would still only apply to wallets adopting it.
> --
> Pieter
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170225/7fecc6c7/attachment.html>

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list