CVE-2017-9230

The Bitcoin Proof-of-Work algorithm does not consider a certain attack methodology related to 80-byte block headers with a variety of initial 64-byte chunks followed by the same 16-byte chunk, multiple candidate root values ending with the same 4 bytes, and calculations involving sqrt numbers. This violates the security assumptions of (1) the choice of input, outside of the dedicated nonce area, fed into the Proof-of-Work function should not change its difficulty to evaluate and (2) every Proof-of-Work function execution should be independent. NOTE: a number of persons feel that this methodology is a benign mining optimization, not a vulnerability

The Bitcoin Proof-of-Work algorithm does not consider a certain attack methodology related to 80-byte block headers with a variety of initial 64-byte chunks followed by the same 16-byte chunk, multiple candidate root values ending with the same 4 bytes, and calculations involving sqrt numbers. This violates the security assumptions of (1) the choice of input, outside of the dedicated nonce area, fed into the Proof-of-Work function should not change its difficulty to evaluate and (2) every Proof-of-Work function execution should be independent. NOTE: a number of persons feel that this methodology is a benign mining optimization, not a vulnerability

** EN DISPUTA ** El algoritmo de Prueba de trabajo de Bitcoin no considera una determinada metodología de ataque relacionada con encabezados de bloque de 80 bytes con una variedad de fragmentos iniciales de 64 bytes seguidos por el mismo fragmento de 16 bytes, terminando múltiples valores de raíz de candidato con los mismos 4 bytes y cálculos con números sqrt. Esto viola los supuestos de seguridad de (1) la elección de la entrada, fuera del área específica de nonce, alimentada a la función Prueba de trabajo no debería cambiar su dificultad para evaluar y (2) cada ejecución de la función Prueba de trabajo debería Se independiente. NOTA: varias personas sienten que esta metodología es una optimización minera benigna, no una vulnerabilidad.