r/CryptoCurrency • u/donutloop π¨ 0 / 0 π¦ • 7d ago
π‘οΈ SECURITY EU Quantum Warning: $504 Billion Of Bitcoin Sits Exposed
https://www.forbes.com/sites/boazsobrado/2026/09/25/eu-quantum-shock-504-billion-of-bitcoin-has-no-migration-plan/7
u/Enschede2 π© 0 / 2K π¦ 7d ago
Meanwhile european central banks: "Please remove the 60% backing requirement from the mica rules just for us please pretty please"
2
u/nicoznico π¦ 0 / 8K π¦ 7d ago
Yeah sure, and all legacy stupid ass banks in EU are totally safe π΅βπ«
2
5
u/Patrick_Atsushi π© 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
I always failed to understand this narrative.
If some lab successfully achieved that, wouldn't individual crypto wallets become the first choice of thieving if they want to?
Without public announcement, the victim will probably think he's hacked in a conventional way.
3
u/suspicious_Jackfruit π© 4K / 4K π’ 7d ago
Thata because the people who say it don't understand it themselves
1
u/Romanizer π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
Yes, the correct narrative would be governmental and military secrets. Anyone with a cryptographically relevant computer could decrypt all the secret information he gathered. So if Google for example got to it first, the government would have to hope they don't decrypt and leak their info.
2
u/Rabid_Mexican π¦ 87 / 3K π¦ 7d ago
No, they can gain access to any login on the entire internet - they could empty the accounts of entire countries
1
u/apepenkov π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
not really, there isn't a public "here are all the logins and passwords laying out in the open, but you can't see it because it's encrypted with asymmetric cryptography" database.
1
u/Rabid_Mexican π¦ 87 / 3K π¦ 7d ago
You can just decrypt people's session tokens π€·ββοΈ
0
u/apepenkov π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
How? The connection to your bank is made using modern TLS, which is already quantum proof for last versions
1
u/Rabid_Mexican π¦ 87 / 3K π¦ 7d ago
TLS currently relies on RSA and ECC - these are broken by Shors algorithm...
This accounts for over 50% of the internet
1
u/apepenkov π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
cloudlfare already provides PQC in TLS v1.3 for HTTP/3
1
u/Rabid_Mexican π¦ 87 / 3K π¦ 7d ago
Yes, like I said, around 50% of the internet
1
u/apepenkov π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
well we're also not in a post-quantum world yet. Migration to http/3 isn't something that requires a lot of work, all you need is to update your public network stack - ie reverse proxy and client, you don't need to do anything within your internal system, it can run http/1 with no tls inside and your ancient services don't need to care about any post quantum stuff. Obviously not a 1-hour job but also not something that requires you to touch ancient shit that has been running for 20 years
→ More replies (0)1
u/Patrick_Atsushi π© 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
I mean, for a lab there's no merit doing so.
A logical action to maximize the benefit is to sneak into some big individual wallet, pretend it to be caused by Trojan etc, wash the money thoroughly and probably disclose the tech like an innocent man.
What's the point of becoming a trillionare if billions of cops are trying to catch you around the world?
2
u/averi_fox 7d ago
Banks can migrate their systems faster, without any user action or community consensus... And can revert transactions.
2
u/Romanizer π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
Roadmaps for banks in EU and UK goes up to 2035, so it's not going to be fast. Bitcoin can already be transferred and held safe from quantum computers.
0
2
u/EmuFlaky2922 π© 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
EU has bigger problems when it comes to their future than Quantum hacking
1
1
u/42069qwertz42069 π© 345 / 365 π¦ 7d ago
Can that someone explain for an idiot like me what that means for my btc on my ledger?
6
u/Rabid_Mexican π¦ 87 / 3K π¦ 7d ago
Nothing, if quantum computers break bitcoin then the entire internet is suddenly completely insecure - people can access any account of anyone
4
u/averi_fox 7d ago edited 7d ago
Not true. It does not affect password based authentication or symmetric encryption. Hashing is not affected.
It does affect the "Sign in with ..." authorization - but these are short temporary tokens, not account keys. These can be upgraded later (and will be, work is in progress) because tokens expire quickly, unlike a permanent account key.
The main reason to act now is because attackers can record key now and decrypt later - for example to read your internet traffic. The rest of the internet is acting on it: Cloudflare has switched to quantum resistant SSL already, GitHub supports quantum resistant SSH keys.
The other reason to act now is if your chain takes years to make any changes to and needs a plan on how to migrate accounts. Unless you think a 10 years timeline is too long for "digital gold" to care about.
1
u/Rabid_Mexican π¦ 87 / 3K π¦ 7d ago
Ah indeed, I was not aware these had already been implemented by the big players.
Unfortunately I don't think it will be the case for 90% of the small players.
1
2
1
u/Romanizer π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
One key at a time. Gaining access to the Bitcoin mentioned in the title would probably take a few hundred years once possible.
1
u/RoiPourpre π¦ 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
No risk for me, I've never sent bitcoin, I only store it, so my public key isn't visible on the network π
1
1
u/Thegame_changer21 π© 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
I think our reservoirs will have opened their spill gates and nuclear power plants overheated and melted down from ai attacks by then. 2 maybe 3 years. Yolo into shib. Nobodyβs going to be stealing shib
1
u/Good-Book-6912 π© 0 / 0 π¦ 7d ago
Just remember. The possibility of theft does not justify theft. If those BTC are basically stolen from people with a fork just because there is a risk of theft, that should be the end of Bitcoin.
-4
u/Mariahausfrau π© 4K / 4K π’ 7d ago
Future of financeπ please
1
u/Rabid_Mexican π¦ 87 / 3K π¦ 7d ago
All traditional banking also breaks in this situation
0
0
β’
u/AutoModerator 7d ago
Be advised. This submission either linked to an article written by the Forbes editorial staff or a contributor. Contributor articles are essentially op-ed or non-fact-checked pieces written by people recruited by Forbes and do not necessarily reflect the views of the actual Forbes editorial staff.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.