For a long time, I thought of the blockchain as almost synonymous with cryptocurrencies, so as I saw stuff like “Odyssey” and “lbry” appearing and being “based on the blockchain”, my first thought was that it was another crypto scam. Then, I just got reminded of it and started looking more into it, and it just seemed like regular torrenting. For example, what’s the big innovation separating Odyssey from Peertube, which is also decentralized and also uses P2P? And what part of it does the blockchain really play, that couldn’t be done with regular P2P? More generally, and looking at the futur, does the blockchain offer new possibilities that the fediverse or pre-existing protocols don’t have?

  • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    So we can’t trust hardware wallets then. Isn’t that… a problem? Something that needs to be solved?

    yup, huge one, something I have sat across the table from the engineers of some of the leading hardware wallet companies and asking them to address. so far what I see are a bunch of companies lining up to say “trust me bro”, I look forward to better options though I suspect that no matter how you cut it, due to people wanting convince it will still be you trusting someone, its just a question of how tight your grip on thier throat is. or you go techno-hermit and build your own kit if you really need something digital.

    Why do you trust that cold wallet? Are you sure they didn’t leak the key somehow? We’ve already established that there’s no trust or reason to trust them.

    Its a physical set of steel discs with the key encoded on them, locked in a safe with a copy locked in an off-location safe. they leak about as much as one might expect things in your safe might leak. do you control these places? I often think about systems like this looking top provide tiers of control and ownership, you own your accounts legally, physically AND technically. a data breech at a bank using this system drains only the banks accounts, yours are fine (assuming a correct fail-safe desgin)

    If I were a cryptocoin blackhat, I’d sell a bunch of broken RNGs to the idiotic cold-wallet people and slowly steal money from them over the next 20 years. Its like the easiest steal ever, the entire crytpocoin community is completely blind to how fucking stupid they are.

    You should get on that, I’m sure it will work really well, you realize there have been people working on satoshi’s cold wallets for over a decade? When this cryptography breaks it will be an advance in quantum tech and we will all be boned.

    Are you sure that those people who think they’ve “forgotten their passphrase” really forgot their passphrase? What if its the cold-wallet that betrayed them?

    Wow, a band of rng guessing thieves only targeting wallets that have been lost by those who would reasonably believe they forgot or lost access to thier key, this sounds like a script hollywood will need in its new AI future!

    • dragontamer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      hmac(passphrase, “one”) -> seed used to create the private key.

      Its so god damn simple man. Passphrase is the key. Standardize the solution so that when Hmac(passphrase, ‘one’) emits the same private key on two separate devices, we know that their code is legitimate. Run tests on commercial solutions to make sure they emit the standard answer to a set of publicly known private-keys (as well as a few personal tests to ensure it works on your end) and bam, problem solved.

      You’re telling me that all the best cryptocoin wallet peeps can’t come up with a college-textbook answer like that?

      As other keys are needed, use hmac(passphrase, “two”) and hmac(passphrase, “three”), etc. etc.


      No. The answer is that no one is really trying to solve the info-sec issue with regards to cryptocoin. Its just a money game to them. There’s elementary / college-level solutions that are in the front of any textbook (or maybe left as an exercise, that you’d find at the back of the book / answer key).

      When the level of cryptography knowledge is this primitive, I know that the entire damn community ain’t serious about it and I shouldn’t waste my time with them.

        • dragontamer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Oh really, wallet hardware companies are publishing the hmac and algorithm used to go from passphrase to private key?

          Care to post one?

          • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            there are opensource wallets, the standard is called BIP39

            im not sure if any of the hardware providers are doing it though

            im still not sure what you are getting at, if you are suggesting I somehow trust hardware cold wallet providers, I dont, does not mean Im not stuck using the tools.

            • dragontamer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              if you are suggesting I somehow trust hardware cold wallet providers, I dont

              I’m saying there’s an obvious solution to anyone who has passed a cryptography 101 course here.

              PKI private keys are randomly generated prime numbers and/or ellipitcal curve numbers (depending on algorithm). Either way, that random number generator needs a seed, and that seed can be based off of the passphrase. BIP39 isn’t the whole solution, that’s just a way to turn long-strings of alpha-numeric characters into binary data.

              My overall point is that there’s a blatantly obvious, simple solution to the hardware wallet problem. I brought it up because its not a hard crypto-problem to solve. The fact that there’s no adequate solution in 15 years is a failure of the cryptocoin community. Not due to a failure of basic cryptography problems.


              The cryptocoin community, despite using “cryptography” is a joke. They barely know how to use cryptography even at its most elementary levels. It takes 15 years to come up with crappy, untrusted hardware wallets and they still can’t open a basic textbook to come up with a better solution that’s already written down.

              • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                the issue with the hardware wallet is not a “simple math” problem but a “trust” issue. in reality you simply can’t trust any hardware you didn’t make yourself, in practical use we usually pick vendors we like and decide to trust them.

                for example. many people considered ledger trustworthy until they introduced firmware that indicates a capability to exfiltrate the keys.

                I think the problem you are speaking to was some older hardware keys (and maybe some strange off brands) that encode keys at the factory, to my knowledge no major product does anything like that and they take pains to show you are generating the key. the big back and forth there has been with hardware providers using methods that are potentially reversible or other types of vulnerabilities.

                Yes pretty much all devices will allow you to import a key you have generated by whatever means you prefer, however once you put it on the device you are signing up for the other issues that come with hardware still.

                • dragontamer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t think you recognize how easy it is to generate trust with the methodology I laid out.

                  1. Buy a standard-compliant offline wallet.
                  2. Buy a second, standard-compliant, offline wallet that you know uses a different codebase, as much as possible.
                  3. Generate a passphrase. Use it on #1 and #2 to generate your wallet/private keys.
                  4. Is it the same private key? Success. Unless the wallets have fallen prey to the same flaw (unlikely, as they were manufactured from two separate companies and running two separate code paths), you’re probably good.

                  “The Standard-compliant” method is any algorithm that goes from hmac(passphrase) into seed -> generating the random numbers needed to build a wallet. (Prime numbers or whatever). As far as I can tell, this “standard method” doesn’t exist, not yet anyway.

                  • manitcor@lemmy.intai.tech
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Issue has been the workflow for that, everyone wants something that works with thier phone and self-updates. Also have only seen a couple good air-gapped signers. No one likes the offline signer story except finance governance ppl so far.