0&0 - Хвали Господа, Ломай Закон. BFDB A459 8B0D 89EC 3E4E EA0E A6BA 50AD 252F 3512
Кавказские горы, сакартвело
Joined September 2026
- Tweets371
- Following1.1K
- Followers149
- Likes583
Pinned Tweet
🎁 GIVEAWAY: 3 copies of Bitcoin Hodler (PDF/ePUB)
We hit 100 followers, so it's on.
To enter, just reply with the one self-custody mistake you'll never make again.
⏳ Entries close Sunday Oct 18, 18:00 UTC
🎲 Winners drawn Monday Oct 19 using Bitcoin block hashes
Don't trust, verify.
If you like privacy, autonomy & technology, you should check out @renarchycom 🔥
Awesome designs over there ! 👏
ALT https://renarchy.com/about
An independent publishing and training house for Online Sovereignty:
📚 books (2 on the spool, for now..)
📌guides (Too many, but stay in touch...)
📽️ documentaries (You ain't ready...)
And tools to understand how to hold your own keys, protect your online/physical privacy, do your threat-models & depend on no one.
Droppin' this week, stay tuned.
➡️KAVSEC[.]AGENCY⬅️
🥷🏻Tosge KAVKAZ ⚔️ retweeted
⚡ BITCOIN'S QUANTUM UPGRADE HAS A PROBLEM THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BREAKING PRIVATE KEYS.
Your xpub.
Bitcoin's BIP32 standard lets watch-only wallets derive receiving addresses without accessing private keys.
But existing post-quantum signature standards don't provide that capability out of the box.
Blockstream Research evaluated Dilithium, Falcon, and Hawk.
🔸 Dilithium: Experimental public-key derivation, not deployment-ready.
🔸 Falcon: Compact signatures and fast verification, but no practical BIP32-style public derivation yet.
🔸 Hawk: Withdrawn from NIST's process after a structural security weakness was discovered.
Their preferred lattice-based candidate? Falcon-1024.
Their conservative near-term direction? Hash-based signatures.
Neither solves every problem.
🔍 Bitcoin's quantum transition isn't just about choosing new mathematics.
It's about preserving hardware wallets, watch-only operation, recovery, and eventually advanced signing protocols.
🔒 Security without practical self-custody isn't enough.
blog.blockstream.com/lattice…
Hi @Joe_IO 👋 🔶
Do you plan to add an “auto-complete” feature for retrieving wallets in @MoneroOne ?
It could be useful and make retrieval easier, rather than having to type out every word in full. j
🥷🏻Tosge KAVKAZ ⚔️ retweeted
In 2016, a coffee would have cost you 351,809 sats.
Today, that same coffee would cost you 4,242 sats.
📙 Does nobody want to enter the #Giveaway because the cover is in Russian? 😴
I also have it in English. 🤓
☢ SOMEWHERE, A GUY IS REVERSING THE NIST SEEDS TO FIND SATOSHI'S KEYS 💀
Anthropic just showed the NSA's "mystery" curve seeds were lrand48() + a 1997 timestamp.
And I guarantee someone on Discord already typed: "bro, Satoshi's coins next?" 🤡
Let me save you the week:
- That discovery is about CURVE PARAMETERS, not private keys
- Bitcoin doesn't even use P-256. secp256k1 = y² = x³ + 7. No seed to reverse.
- If Satoshi's keys were crackable, the Patoshi coins would have moved years ago. Thousands of people watch those addresses every day 👀
But here's the part nobody likes to hear 👇
The bots ARE hunting weak keys. Just not Satoshi's. YOURS.
- Brain wallets: swept in seconds
- Milk Sad wallets: drained
- "I generated my seed with a little Python script": you're next 🎯
Satoshi's entropy is fine.
Your random.seed(time.time()) isn't.
Number go up only works if the coins are still yours ⚡
🚨 THE NSA CURVE MYSTERY IS SOLVED. IT WAS JUST A CLOCK.
For 25+ years, cryptographers side-eyed the NIST curves (P-256 & co). The NSA handed over random-looking "seeds" with zero explanation. Backdoor? Rigged math? Nobody knew.
Turns out the answer is way dumber 👀
Claude (Anthropic's AI) cracked it in under 30 minutes:
- No secret passphrase, no hash
- Just the C function lrand48(), seeded with a Unix timestamp from 1997-1998
- P-256 = candidate #1,842 from a run started on Aug 16, 1997
- Fully reproducible with ~20 lines of Python
🔐 What it means
- Not a break. ECDSA is fine.
- A hidden NSA backdoor just got a lot less plausible
- Still open: some valid curves were skipped and nobody knows why 🤔
⚡ The Bitcoin angle
Bitcoin never touched P-256. Satoshi picked secp256k1: y² = x³ + 7. No mystery seed, nothing to trust.
Don't trust, verify - since block 0.
💣 The real lesson for YOU
"Random from the clock" is exactly how wallets get drained:
- Milk Sad (2023): bx generated seeds with a time-seeded Mersenne Twister → wallets emptied
- Android SecureRandom bug (2013) → bitcoin stolen from mobile wallets
Predictable entropy = your keys belong to someone else.
🛡 Protect yourself
- Generate your seed on a reputable hardware wallet or audited open-source software
- No brain wallets, no homemade generators, no "I wrote my own script"
- Dice rolls if you're paranoid (you should be)
The NSA used a clock for their curves. Don't use one for your keys.
Source in the comment section. 👇
🛡 BITCOIN FIXED MONEY. IT DIDN'T FIX YOUR OPSEC.
You can have the perfect cold storage setup and still lose everything to a phone call.
The attacks that hit bitcoiners most often aren't technical:
📱 SIM swap: someone convinces your carrier to move your number to their SIM. Every SMS code is now theirs.
🎣 Phishing: a fake support email, a fake firmware update, a fake wallet app. It looks real. That's the point.
🗣 Social engineering: "Hi, I'm from [your wallet brand], we detected an issue, please confirm your recovery phrase."
No legitimate company will ever ask for your seed. Ever.
The weakest link in your setup is rarely the device. It's what you reveal and who you trust.
Bitcoin Holders covers this in its part on privacy and discretion. 📖
Have you ever received a scam attempt targeting your bitcoin? What did it look like? 👇
🎲 How the draw works (provably fair)
No random website.
No "trust me".
The winners will be picked by the Bitcoin blockchain itself.
1️⃣ Entries close Sunday Oct 18, 18:00 UTC.
Every valid entry gets a number, in reply order: #1, #2, #3…
One entry per account.
2️⃣ Monday, before the draw, I publish the full numbered list right here. No edits after that.
3️⃣ The first Bitcoin block mined after Monday Oct 19, 18:00 UTC picks winner #1.
The next two blocks pick winners #2 and #3.
4️⃣ Each block hash is turned into a number, divided by the number of entries. The remainder + 1 = the winner.
If a number comes out twice, the next block decides.
Nobody can predict or choose a block hash. Not you, not me, not anyone.
Want to check the math yourself?
Hash on mempool.space, then: int(hash, 16) % entries + 1
Don't trust, ₿erify.
