SHA-1, SHA256, SHA512, etc. are hashing algorithms. They're not encryption algorithms. They can't be cracked. At best you could find an algorithm to generate a preimage that would hash to a specific value. But nobody has figured out how to do that yet.
The paper you pointed to was talking about RSA encryption. That is an asymmetric encryption algorithm, not a hashing algorithm. It has absolutely nothing to do with SHA. ALL public key encryption algorithms are subject to defeat with Shor's algorithm on a quantum computer. The paper is just one example of a specific technique. There are hundreds of others. And yes, you should assume that the NSA already has the capability of reading anything you encrypt.
The important thing this has nothing to do with hashing. It does have to do with SIGNING your digital transactions. Which is why you should, never, ever reuse Bitcoin wallet addresses. The instant you make a payment from an address, you should always assume that private key is compromised and move all your remaining coins to a new address.
And yes, you should assume that the NSA already has the capability of reading anything you encrypt.
Agreed
The instant you make a payment from an address, you should always assume that private key is compromised and move all your remaining coins to a new address.
SHA-1, SHA256, SHA512, etc. are hashing algorithms. They're not encryption algorithms. They can't be cracked. At best you could find an algorithm to generate a preimage that would hash to a specific value. But nobody has figured out how to do that yet.
The paper you pointed to was talking about RSA encryption. That is an asymmetric encryption algorithm, not a hashing algorithm. It has absolutely nothing to do with SHA. ALL public key encryption algorithms are subject to defeat with Shor's algorithm on a quantum computer. The paper is just one example of a specific technique. There are hundreds of others. And yes, you should assume that the NSA already has the capability of reading anything you encrypt.
The important thing this has nothing to do with hashing. It does have to do with SIGNING your digital transactions. Which is why you should, never, ever reuse Bitcoin wallet addresses. The instant you make a payment from an address, you should always assume that private key is compromised and move all your remaining coins to a new address.
Well, if you can find an efficient way to find collisions, then thats the same as "cracking" the hashing algorithms.
This is what happened to SHA-0 by Chabaud
Thanks for the clarifications.
Agreed
Very important.