Any other banks working with bitcoin exchanges atm? A friend is looking for someone that can handle ACH transactions for a new exchange.

bump

Coinbase is the only US based company I know of using ACH transactions. I'm trying to find out if there is a banking institution that would be willing to handle ACH transactions for a bitcoin exchange. I know Mt Gox used Dwolla and Coinbase uses MongoDB. I'm looking for someone with expertise in this area that is willing to help a new exchange get setup.

Anyone know of a Bank that handles ACH transactions for a bitcoin exchange. I know Coinbase uses MongoDB, just wondering if anyone with a financial background has information they can help me out with.

Thx death I wanted to see if there was a way to make an algorithm based on phi and had read this article earlier. http://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/11293/hmac-sha256-vs-rsa-sha256-which-one-to-use

I was reading an article on entropy problems concerning public keys and was wondering if the algorithm would work better with RSA. Eurler's totient fuction came to mind as I have been looking more into phi's relationship to scalar and vector fields and had an idea is all. Clip from the article is below.

"If the initial seed to the pseudorandom number generator is generated with low entropy, this could result in multiple devices generating different moduli which share the prime factor p and have different second factors q. Then both moduli can be easily factored by computing their GCD: p = gcd(N1, N2).

OpenSSL’s RSA key generation functions this way: each time random bits are produced from the entropy pool to generate the primes p and q, the current time in seconds is added to the entropy pool. Many, but not all, of the vulnerable keys were generated by OpenSSL and OpenSSH, which calls OpenSSL’s RSA key generation code.

Computing the GCDs of all pairs of keys

If any pair of RSA moduli N1 and N2 share, say, the same prime factor p in common, but have different second factors q1 and q2, then we can easily factor the moduli by computing their greatest common divisor. On my desktop computer, computing the GCD of two 1024-bit RSA moduli took about 17µs.

For the mathematically inclined, I’ll explain how we were able to use this idea to factor a large collection of keys.

The simplest way that one might try to factor keys is by computing the GCD of each pair of RSA moduli. A back of the envelope calculation shows that doing a GCD computation for all pairs of moduli in our data sets would take 24 years of computation time on my computer."

Here is a link that explains in part why i brought up the subject http://en.reddit.com/r/crypto/comments/1l886l/some_thoughts_on_proofofwork_systems/

Also was wondering if anyone knew if Lamport Signatures would work with SHA3 in the inevitable case that someone was able to find collisions with SHA256. Quantum computing it rapidly approaching with the use of graphene.

Here is the article I found on the topic http://cleantechnica.com/2013/12/23/mit-team-shows-how-graphene-could-work-in-quantum-computer/

I guess collisions wont really matter in the future with preimage resistance.

Ok could you explain why using ECDSA keys are more viable over RSA keys short of the difference in speed and size of the key. I am a bit new to this and trying to understand the functionality of SHA-256.

Thx guys I understand RSA works better with larger prime integers and that there is a difference in functionality concerning Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm when processing using SHA-256. The reason I bring up the question concerning compatibility with public key encryption and signature using RSA and its association to the Euler's totient function is to determine if the size differences between RSA and ECDSA signatures could be resolved using faster computers and if so how this would effect the DNSSEC transmission of keys and signatures. The key size of the Elliptic curve needs to match the hash algorithm in order to prevent weaker halves of the signature from being attacked. So I guess what I was trying to ask is with faster computers in the future using Graphene chips if RSA could be utilized using SHA-256 and SHA-384 to speed up validation at the cost of slower ECDSA signing or would this weaken the signing algorithm to much using 3072 bit keys instead of 2048 bit keys? I understand that RSA is much slower with ECDSA signing but validation would greatly be increased by using RSA. I guess I should of explained what I was looking for a bit better before asking.

Super computers are just a few years out so instead of working with the limitations of what we currently have I wanted to see if there was a way to speed up validation using RSA and if this is possible hashing with SHA-256, if that makes any sense.

I'm working on a new project and could use some help from anyone that has worked on or understands the SHA-256 algorithm. Basically I need to know how compatible the two cryptography algorithms are if at all and whether or not a new alt coin could be designed around Euclid's Algorithm using the Euler's totient function. Im not sure this is the best place to raise the question but was hoping someone with a bit of knowledge in cryptography could help me out.

 (Euclid's algorithm) for calculating the greatest common divisor (g.c.d.) of two numbers a and b in locations named A and B. The algorithm proceeds by successive subtractions in two loops: IF the test B ≥ A yields "yes" (or true) (more accurately the number b in location B is greater than or equal to the number a in location A) THEN, the algorithm specifies B ← B − A (meaning the number b − a replaces the old b). Similarly, IF A > B, THEN A ← A − B. The process terminates when (the contents of) B is 0, yielding the g.c.d. in A.