MIT Researchers found basic rookie mistakes, when giving their time for free. Iota cryptography was broken.
Really? Why then the researchers wrote in their report:
Quote
We emphasize that to produce a signature on a msg2, our attacks require Alice to sign an innocent-looking related message, msg1, of our choosing. This is a chosen message attack. We have not developed a known message attack.
and
Quote
...Madars Virza did an independent analysis to try to directly invert the hash function using algebraic techniques (which has not yet been successful, and is not included in the report).
?
Sigh.
You always find one or two sentences to quote of your critiques, thus hiding the 100 other sentences, one of which is by Bruce Schenier, god of crypto "In 2017, leaving your crypto algorithm vulnerable to differential cryptanalysis is a rookie mistake. It says that no one of any calibre analyzed their system, and that the odds that their fix makes the system secure is low".
You are a rookie, and should gtfo of crypto.
My call back in february was correct, your own hash function was not even worthy of my time to analyze, just like many others of any calibre react upon seeing it.
Can not be taken seriously.
Byteball ftw, simple secp256k1 with sha256, classic choice, world tested, best crypto. Iota embarrassement
