Because the Bitcoin SegWit Wallet funds are not at risk

Cryptocurrency analysts, Bryce Weiner and Andrew Desantis, have decided to explain why Segregated Witness (SegWit) – an implementation to reduce the size of Bitcoin transactions – has a vulnerability. According to them, this improvement achieved through a soft fork in 2017 has made Bitcoin susceptible to an attack vector that could steal Bitcoin funds from a specific portfolio.

With segregated testimony, Bitcoin transactions are faster and cheaper to be processed by miners. They require less space in each block allowing you to process multiple transactions in each of the blocks. This makes the network much more efficient without having to increase the size of the blocks.

In a blog post written by ProofofResearch, this theory is denied and explained. According to the author of the blog post, Andrew Desantis claims to have found a way to steal funds from a wallet address using only a collision of addresses.

In a recent tweet, Bryce explains:

"In a single tweet: it has been shown that two deterministic addresses for which you have private keys can create a transaction that allows you to spend funds in a simulated SegWit address, if that address collides with an existing funded address, the funds could be stolen. "

Following the extract used to create Segregated Witness (bech32) addresses you can answer to Bryce Weiner that the process of creating a SegWit address (PW2PKH) is the same as described by a Twitter user who answered Bryce.

They are. If we're talking about bech32 addresses, you need to use a compressed public key, which is an ECDSA public key. That key is then subjected to hash twice with ripemd160 and SHA256.

So there is no way there could be a collision in the way you described. https://t.co/YHwAZmE8Wd

– CryptoMedication (@ProofofResearch) 5 January 2019

However, Bryce Weiner I just explained that the author of the tweet commented in this way.

According to Winer, the SegWit addresses could collide with existing addresses. The author also mentions the ECDSA concept, which is important because it refers to signatures that adhere to elliptic curve cryptography. According to ProofofResearch, Bitcoin uses the sepc256k1 standard.

If a public key is obfuscated, there is no reason to believe or suggest that the SegWit address would correspond to an existing address.

"None of the foregoing even takes into account the fact that the compressed public key has been hashed with SHA256, so it has been erased again using ripemd160 to produce the P2KPKH address," explains the author of the blog post .

In this blog post, the author provides a complete explanation of how these two individuals, Weiner and Desantis, are wrong about the claims they have made. The author says that if they are able to provide more information or evidence about it, then they would be able to keep the discussion.