The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.

New answers tagged

5

We're deep in speculative territory here but, theoretically, if the elliptic curve algorithm were broken the entire Bitcoin system would immediately collapse. Let's consider the case where you've successfully guarded your own funds somehow. How many public keys would still be out there vulnerable to such an attack? Even though your "base" survived the ...


2

The Bitcoin blockchain is not absolutely immutable, it is probabilistically immutable. We say this because the history of transactions (the blockchain) is secured by mining power, and mining success is a probabilistic. Given a certain amount of hashpower, we expect that we'll find a block within some certain amount of time - but it is possible to find the ...


2

The same kind of business trust and legal things that let an exchange or a bank running I suppose. There have been exchanges doing what you said in the past, and they have gotten the same legal pursuit as any other business scamming his clients. Here is some links: https://www.coindesk.com/six-arrested-over-cloned-crypto-exchange-that-stole-e24-million ...


1

No, as far as we know, Ethereum transactions cannot be reversed. The DAO hack exploited a badly coded smart contract. The smart contract runs on top of Ethereum, so there are two layers involved here: the Ethereum blockchain and virtual machine (EVM) and the smart contracts which run on the EVM. Neither the EVM or the Ethereum blockchain were exploited. ...


1

Segwit does not use a different signature algorithm nor does it change any of the properties of a ECDSA signature. Thus if you find transactions that involve the same public keys and the same R value, then yes, the private key for that public key is revealed. However, what you are looking at is not the R value. In fact, you are not even looking at the ...


0

There is nothing special that lightning nodes will have to do. All the advice is basic information security practices. Don't open ports on your node that you don't have to. Use a strong password to access your node. Disable remote logins if you have physical access. Keep the software that is running patched and up to date. Decrease your attack ...


2

The other miners will not be aware that this malicious miner has find the correct hash(win) since he has not propagate it, so they will still try to find the correct hash and some second later one of them will find it correct and propagate it, then cycle will repeat again without anyone knowing that this malicious miner has win second before the one that has ...


0

You would not do PoW if you have a state as central authority and trust anchor. You would simply switch to Proof of Authority or other strategies, e.g. permission-ed blockchains. Further, you could use other Decentralized Ledger Technologies. PoW is so great because everyone can join the network without revealing their identity.


0

If what you mean by adopt bitcoin as a state currency means replace their existing fiat currency; I believe there would a lot bigger problems to consider. If they did do that, it would essentially be saying that their money no longer has any value, which would cause a massive panic within their population. A type of panic similar to when India banned the 500 ...


0

If I go back to block #1000 and add one more transaction, this will change the hash and it wont be the same one stored in #1001. However, how the hash of block #1000 changes in the first place if it was already calculated? Once a block has been mined and accepted as part of the longest valid chain (ie, several confirmations deep), it will not ever change (...


0

Hashes don't actually 'change'. When you add a transaction to a block you are creating another block. It's like an author published a book and then next year printed a new edition with an extra comma in the page 36 and the fans said he released a 'new' book. It doesn't make sense for books but for blockchain every bit counts.


Top 50 recent answers are included