multihash security proofs
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 1.8k
- Forks
- 320
- Avg merge
- 11d 15h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Are there any security proofs for multihash or similar constructs? I'd think the results would say roughly that, for some desirable hash function properties, multihash is not-too-unlike a hash function satisfying the weakest version of that property among satisfied by any of the hash functions with which it can be instantiated.
As stated this is false of course, there are countless protocols for which substituting multihash as if it were as hash function will break the protocol, like anything that requires uniqueness, but probably far more. It's worth writing down a general setting in which multihash is not inherently broken though, maybe including signature scheme requirements.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No files, tests, or entry points are identified in the issue. Begin by surveying security proofs for multihash and related constructs, then define a precise setting and determine which hash-function or signature properties can be preserved; done means documenting a defensible general result and its limitations.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- cryptography
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100