📅 Original date posted:2013-06-06
📝 Original message:>From https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=20955.msg264038#msg264038
This may be an appropriate thread to mention that the the "checksum" at the end of an address does not effectively prevent single character errors or transpositions.
For instance https://blockexplorer.com/search/1ByteCoin shows that
1ByteCoinAddressesMatch1kpCWNXmHKW 1ByteCoinAddressesMatch1kpCxNXmHKW
are both valid addresses even though they only differ by one character.
Similarly, the valid addresses
1ByteCoinAddressesMatchcNN781jjwLY 1ByteCoinAddressesMatchcNN718jjwLY
only differ by one transposition.
ByteCoin
----- Original Message -----
From: Melvin Carvalho
Sent: 06/06/13 12:37 PM
To: Bitcoin Dev
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] address collision and undependability
There was a discussion on #bitcon-dev yesterday
I stated that it would be impractical to generate two bitcoin addresses, such that they differed in exactly one character (modulo different checksums).
The corollary to this is that if you find an address with a verifiable signature. Changing one character of that address would have no known private key, and hence be normally undependable.
Does that sound correct?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130606/ec2b4c4c/attachment.html>;
Byte Coin [ARCHIVE] /
npub1hs…caysa
2023-06-07 15:02:58
in reply to nevent1q…d57n
Author Public Key
npub1hsxhhfy2htny8hn35xhmshksk9ztf47ps0yz3ee7734sy7uw370sycaysaPublished at
2023-06-07 15:02:58Event JSON
{
"id": "e9c49657e01951bd3e2d18dfe7ee8035886a8a81b97e01cd45e1f7f58d035193",
"pubkey": "bc0d7ba48abae643de71a1afb85ed0b144b4d7c183c828e73ef46b027b8e8f9f",
"created_at": 1686150178,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"66074ead67ccf6438fc240f4217c6927b63f5e2c8bbd5874dd3ba9a36e6f6228",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"3bf0bfddc0409cc556c68d2eb050c2bc5ca44715c8bf11ca4563a956e7d149cc",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"e316966328c4cb66c34719ef9a7b3bc54ef601663ad4ab06185991237735aa19"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-06-06\n📝 Original message:\u003eFrom https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=20955.msg264038#msg264038\n\nThis may be an appropriate thread to mention that the the \"checksum\" at the end of an address does not effectively prevent single character errors or transpositions.\n\nFor instance https://blockexplorer.com/search/1ByteCoin shows that\n\n1ByteCoinAddressesMatch1kpCWNXmHKW 1ByteCoinAddressesMatch1kpCxNXmHKW \nare both valid addresses even though they only differ by one character.\n\nSimilarly, the valid addresses\n\n1ByteCoinAddressesMatchcNN781jjwLY 1ByteCoinAddressesMatchcNN718jjwLY \nonly differ by one transposition.\n\nByteCoin\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: Melvin Carvalho\nSent: 06/06/13 12:37 PM\nTo: Bitcoin Dev\nSubject: [Bitcoin-development] address collision and undependability\n\nThere was a discussion on #bitcon-dev yesterday\nI stated that it would be impractical to generate two bitcoin addresses, such that they differed in exactly one character (modulo different checksums).\nThe corollary to this is that if you find an address with a verifiable signature. Changing one character of that address would have no known private key, and hence be normally undependable.\nDoes that sound correct?\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130606/ec2b4c4c/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "3eba7e568852f45d3336562f0166a7b529c4ac85295a4dd826c69d3d615f278c7ef5ddc97799b220dda158adbe27019612d1ac00f19a8df895649dfdc4a04c3d"
}