Ethereum Community Discussion: Is BIP 39 Check Sumato Safety Risk or Comfort?
The development and maintenance of the Ethereum block chain has sparked the intense debate on the role of 39 Mnemonic checks on the Intensive Discussion of Developers, researchers and users. This article looks at the justification for eliminating the BIP 39 checksum and contrary to it from the standard and its potential impact on safety.
What is the BIP 39 Check Summary?
The BIP 39 Sanomat is a safe way of saving and checking private keys. It creates a 12-word sentence that comprises 28 characters (16 letters, 8 digits and 4 special characters), which works for each individual Ethereum account. The check sum is calculated from the first five words in the memoir, ensuring that all changes or changes in the original sentence lead to the same check sum.
Why eliminate BIP 39 checksum?
Supporters claim that the BIP 39 check sum can pose a security risk combined with other factors, such as the random number generator of the Ethereum network (RNG). In another system, RNG should be able to create new numbers for each account without the effect of external factors such as the Mnemonic statement. However, there is a natural weakness in the current implementation: if the checker changes due to a change in the variation, the resulting checksum may not correspond to the original, possibly permissible access to accounts.
Case against elimination
Critics oppose that the optional removal or making of the bip 39 checks will lead to:
- Increased complexity: Users and developers should release how to produce and check memoirs, which may lead to increased complexity.
- Efficiency: Existing implementation allows users to record a large number of memoirs that may be unfair to those with extensive knowledge of the secret.
- Safety Risks: As mentioned earlier, the checksum does not necessarily provide sufficient safety combined with other factors such as weak rng.
Case of Optional BIP 39 Optional
Others claim that making the BIP 39 as an option for an option would give users the opportunity to choose how they want to save and check private keys. This approach would be:
- Promote flexibility: Users can choose from various memoirs and implementations, allowing them to choose the best way to meet their needs.
- Reduce complexity: By providing an option, users can avoid the re -development of complex concepts or a fixed length of memory.
conclusion
The discussion surrounding the BIP 39 checksum is ongoing, a valid argument on both sides. While completely removing the checking scissor may seem attractive due to potential safety risks, it is necessary to consider the following:
- Safety Compromise: Current implementation has proven to be sufficient for most users, and the optional of the checks does not significantly endanger safety.
- User Settings: Providing an option for users to choose the approach they want, ensuring that they can still use the Mnemonic sentences of their choice.
Ultimately, the removal of the BIP 39’s check -in from the standard is still a matter of discussion in the Ethereum community. As the ecosystem continues to develop and grow, it is necessary to find a balance between safety and user comfort.
Recommendations
The following recommendations may be considered to alleviate potential security risks related to current implementation:
- Improve RNG: Ethereum team could explore ways to improve the random number generator performance and randomness.
2.