j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckM=<div class="post"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1735.msg25237#msg25237">Quote from: farmer_boy on November 28, 2010, 11:48:16 PM</a></div><div class="quote"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1735.msg21412#msg21412">Quote from: da2ce7 on November 10, 2010, 11:50:34 PM</a></div><div class="quote">I was thinking about this overnight, Wikileaks has in-house cryptology and security experts; they could do an audit on the Bitcoin security and we could donate bitcon to pay for itÂ
scratch my back and IÂll scratch yours.<br/>I donÂt know about the feasibility, but on the surface it sounds like it would be beneficial to both wikileaks and bitcoin.<br/></div>There is nothing to be audited as far as an academic cryptographer would be concerned. For that to happen, the specification of Bitcoin would have to be of better quality. That needs to happen first and only when that is done, there is a chance someone will want to take a serious look. <br/></div>Satoshi's paper is a good introduction I'd think.<br/><br/>And another thing, I'm not sure about academic cryptographers, but in the 'real world' security auditing is regularly done on source code, or sometimes even without source code (either by reverse engineering or black box testing).<br/></div> text/html
https://whatsonchain.com/tx/8eae5eddf72e20bc6825b77fa0c53d0ddd08bf4da62ce4aa706e8d0ecffde083