- From: Dave Longley <dlongley@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 11:49:48 -0400
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>
On 05/18/2016 11:14 AM, David Booth wrote: > On 05/18/2016 10:58 AM, Dave Longley wrote: >> On 05/17/2016 10:18 AM, Timothy Holborn wrote: >>> It's an old article[1], wondering if their is any technical update >>> since? >>> >>> [1] >>> https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-is-not-quantum-safe-and-how-we-can-fix-1375242150 >>> >>> >> >> This is exactly why using public key cryptography that relies upon the >> assumed difficulty of particular math problems to encrypt data on a >> public blockchain is a bad idea. >> >> This means that using today's common asymmetric encryption methods of >> RSA/ECC to encrypt certain types of data on a public blockchain should >> not be considered secure. That encrypted data is available to everyone >> ... and it won't stay encrypted for all that long. This is especially a >> problem for identity-related information, which is often sensitive and >> has a long shelf life. > > What alternatives would you suggest? To follow on to my suggestion -- you can certainly put things like a proof of existence on a public blockchain. Just don't put the encrypted, highly sensitive, long-lived data itself there. -- Dave Longley CTO Digital Bazaar, Inc. http://digitalbazaar.com
Received on Wednesday, 18 May 2016 15:50:11 UTC