how long will existing encryption last

Updated on January 21, 2020 in Cryptocurrency News
12 on January 21, 2020
Asymmetric cryptography.
It is it that makes it possible to generate encryption keys for symmetric cryptography.

Transmission, encryption of information is carried out (in most cases) by symmetric cryptographic systems. Because they are much more reliable, less for a key, less load on computing power and the like. But the main thing is reliability.

But in this reliable system, there is an unreliable element, the most important element, an asymmetric system.

Everyone calmed down. No problems. Everything is reliable. But why then the specialized organizations responsible for the “reliability of cryptography” are looking for something, obviously, they are not happy with something.

Why do recognized authorities of cryptographic science give such ambiguous definitions as “conditionally reliable cryptography”.

It is interesting to talk about the known facts of the rejection of some asymmetric systems and the intensified search for new ones.

Mathematicians know that all modern asymmetric cryptography is based on unproven mathematical statements. Simply put, from a scientific point of view, only on hypotheses. On unsubstantiated assumptions. It’s good that we know which ones.
 
And cryptography on elliptic curves, which is part of blockchain technology (digital signature), has overgrown with obscure facts. On the one hand, we recommend it for domestic use, on the other hand, it is forbidden to use it in serious matters.

There is an opinion of cryptographers that any system with a public and private key will be hacked sooner or later, and then all your secrets will become known. You save them now (they recommend cryptography on elliptic curves!), And then they will open everything. Well, not a fact.

This is just a danger. And it’s not about the progress of quantum computing and (the main nuisance) the provision of these services to anyone, for money, over the network.

But it’s not that. Brute-force attack is the fate of the monkey. We are all a little monkeys, we are all afraid of a quantum computer and a complete search. This is not the worst, the keys can be increased and generally go into even larger numerical fields.

 But the main danger is cryptanalysis. He is developing.
The life of a cryptanalyst is like that of a secret agent. Even his family does not know about his real job.
I wonder why such a conspiracy.

The author is committed to the idea that if such “researchers” of asymmetric systems find something, then they will never tell us about it. Or didn’t they already say?

I would like to talk about this and much more in this topic directly relating to our security.

 
 
  • Liked by
Reply
0 on January 21, 2020

This could not be a threat, although there are numerous powerful super computers nowadays, encryptions are made in crypto to completely encrypt data. I know a bit in hashing but I’m not a computer knowledgeable person. I believe, what we are using are hashing algorithms that primarily not allowing the data to be decrypted going back to its source. And that technology makes it the most secured and reliable to people. Soon, these powerful supercomputers will not be focused on decrypting already existing data, but mainly in a purpose of creating stronger encryption.

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
1 on January 21, 2020

Google has come up with quantum supremacy through which calculations can be performed in a very short time and the same can’t be cracked by the conventional conputer used all around.

This serves to be a tool in the hands of hackers, criminals to crack blockchain based cryptocurrencies like bitcoin ans others to be the targets. Also it is stated to crack the encryption upon which the internet is built on. Later news revealed it isn’t that powerful to crack bitcoin. Right now it has got only 53 qbits, to crack the bitcoin there is need for at least 1500 qbits. This way no nees to fear about the encryption of the algorithm.

on January 21, 2020
LOL, do you think that quantum computers will be mass produces if ever they successfully crack 2^256 code? so it will not be for everyone’s used. And for the record, there are a lot of development from behind. So far the following are candidates.

[1] Lamport Signature – (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamport_signature#Public_key_for_multiple_messages)

[2] Multivariate cryptography – (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivariate_cryptography)

[3] Lattice-based cryptography – (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice-based_cryptography)

for the record though, bitcoin addresses are not at risk to attack not unless the attacker know your public key. The only way to attack us is that if the QC is fast enough to obtain our public key in a few minutes based on our private key.

 
Show more replies
  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020

There will be much more implemented and worth solutions in the near future i am sure of that.
You can take for instance our current encryption systems in everywhere you go from password to 2fa to public and private keys acessing SSH.

Surely the best would be to increase max encryption byte sizes but that’s way more complex to talk about it here.

About bitcoin you can expect something newer sooner or later till some hacker gets some cracking implementation.
If it gets cracked (assuming private keys hacked) developers will jump into and make it stronger.

That’s when existing encryption will no longer exist and new one emerge.

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020

There will be much more implemented and worth solutions in the near future i am sure of that.
You can take for instance our current encryption systems in everywhere you go from password to 2fa to public and private keys acessing SSH.

Surely the best would be to increase max encryption byte sizes but that’s way more complex to talk about it here.

About bitcoin you can expect something newer sooner or later till some hacker gets some cracking implementation.
If it gets cracked (assuming private keys hacked) developers will jump into and make it stronger.

That’s when existing encryption will no longer exist and new one emerge.

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020
I don’t even want to mention quantum computers here. This whole idea is in such an early phase that even people working on this technology can’t fully understand how to make it compatible with the existing binary software.
How long will the encryption last? Probably as long as there’s no real threat to its existence. People have a tendency to upgrade things when they need to. When one country makes a submarine another country makes locating beacons and sonars to detect it and so on. For now there’s no impending threat so nobody cares and nobody tries to upgrade the security.
 
 
  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020

The current encryption technology is going to last less than what we predicted before.
Bitcoin’s encryption and private keys would be vulnerable by the year 2030.
But only the chief projects working on it would achieve that feat and lets hope none of them would ever attack bitcoin.

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020

To summarize all of the above:

1. A conditional hacker does not need to have a quantum computer to carry out attacks. The problem is that companies (and there are more than 5) that own a quantum computer give it to anyone over the network.

2. Cryptography on elliptic curves, with a key length of 256 bits (this is a blockchain bitcoin) to crack, even by brute force attack (this is a method for a monkey man, a person without thinking, which everyone fears most, why?), Is easier than symmetric a system with the same key length a huge number of times, I can’t even write this number down here.

3. Cryptography on elliptic curves is the most controversial system of all about which at least something has been written. It has long been banned in serious matters.

4. There is a large class of weak elliptic curves. Did you check those elliptic curves on which you made your digital signatures on the blockchain? I’m sure it never occurred to you.

And those who standardize and recommend them are themselves interested in having access to your secrets. Do you catch a thought?

5. The opinion of specialists in this field of knowledge.
An international team of researchers led by Divesh Aggarwal of the Singapore Center for Quantum Technology.

They argue that the algorithm for creating a digital signature based on elliptic curves may become vulnerable. The real threat, in their opinion, can be expected by 2027.

6. The opinion of other specialists.
In March 2019, the head of the IBM blockchain direction Jesse Lund also warned about the likelihood of a threat to both the cryptocurrencies themselves and the involved cryptography methods.

“Through reverse engineering, you can achieve private keys that provide access to wallets.” I think this is a real and substantial threat. Bitcoin is a public registry. Thus, you can see on which wallets the largest balances are stored, and then attack them, ”he said.

Lund also noted that over time, the threat posed by the quantum computer will become more urgent. In particular, he emphasized, in the future, quantum computing will be able to calculate private keys using public keys as a template. Thus, according to him, more than half of the existing blockchain systems will be susceptible to this threat.

7. The opinion of experts.
Associate Professor of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation Vladimir Gisin believes that quantum computers really pose a certain threat to decentralized systems, blockchains and cryptocurrencies. According to him, the bitcoin blockchain risks being hacked when 100-qubit quantum computers appear.
He also suggested that there may already be successful mechanisms for hacking the Bitcoin blockchain, but nothing is known about them, because their authors do not want to disclose their knowledge.

“All Bitcoin security is based on some hypotheses that are not fully tested. For example, on the hypothesis that forgery of a signature on a bitcoin network is computationally unrealistic with modern computing power.

But this is a hypothesis.

8. David Chaum, the “godfather” of the cipher bank movement and creator of the first anonymous electronic currency eCash, did not ignore the danger of quantum computing. In particular, he emphasized the importance of urgent development of quantum-resistant protocols.

We have no way of knowing how far states have progressed in creating quantum computers.

Government organizations have repeatedly cracked codes and gained access to unprecedented cryptographic capabilities for many years, but no one suspected this.

Already, the crypto industry must change approaches and work closely on the creation of sustainable mechanisms and technologies, – Decrypt quotes Chauma.

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020
Encryption has always existed since the creation and existence of this universe we find ourselves and been modified as years go by. So to answer your question ‘ How long will existing encryption last’, the duration of the existence of a particular encryption will depend on how frequent the people or group that developed the encryption modify their encryption as the technological world keeps advancing.  The duration of every encryption depends solely on how its been modify to suit the current state of its ecosystem.
 
  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020

Existing encryption is already a model used in banking. It’s very good for security. Hack cases usually occur with the method of fake. Or ponzi systems, people are losing their money. Very powerful computers need to emerge. I think there’s still a good security structure.

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on January 21, 2020

I read earlier today that it would take approximately 2,500 qubits of quantum processing power to successfully break the encryption of an SHA-256 private key.

Since Google only has a 72 qubit Q-computer, and it has taken a decade to reach this point, then a 2,500 qubit quantum processor appears to be approximately 7 years away.

With that said, this will still likely be a super specific system, so I doubt it would actually be used to identify the links between public and private keys.

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
Loading more replies