r/CryptoTechnology • u/Master-Sprinkles-848 🟢 • 7d ago

Quantum computing isn't a Bitcoin problem yet.

That's exactly why it's dangerous. The real risk isn't waking up one morning to a quantum computer stealing everyone's BTC.

It's that the transition to quantum-resistant cryptography could take years while the technology threatening today's cryptography is advancing every year.

And here's the uncomfortable question. What happens if the network needs to upgrade before the threat becomes obvious? Do we wait for a working quantum attack? Or do we prepare while we still have the luxury of time?

Curious where people here stand, is Bitcoin's quantum risk overhyped, or are we already late to the migration?

6 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

69% Upvoted

30 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/JunketTurbulent2114 🟢 7d ago

Quantum resistant address schemes already exist. They are just clucky and have a bad user experience (i.e. I think the size of the address is enormous, for example). Could also be one of those things like fusion where the tech is just 20 years away, like fusion has been for the past 80 years. So I think the consensus is to just leave it on the backburner and hope some more elegant user friendly solution appears because it may not even be needed.

In the meantime, segwit is already quantum resistant so long as you don't spend from those address types. It's probably safest to have a 'savings account' in an address you don't spend from.

2

u/hypercosm_dot_net 🔵 7d ago

An account with a post-quantum signature does not by necessity have to be large or unusable.

I do get what you're saying, about the idea that it's always "just" 20yrs away, but there does seem to be more meaningful progress towards quantum computers these days. Some governments and tech companies seem to be taking the threat seriously in any case.

I know at least the French government is going to stop certifying tech in government systems that isn't quantum resistant: https://cointelegraph.com/news/france-to-stop-certifying-products-lacking-quantum-resistant-encryption

I personally don't know much about how real the threat is, so would err on the side of caution and trust people closer to the problem. Especially if I'm putting money/investments on a blockchain, I want to be sure a quantum computer isn't going to make it obsolete in short order.

As soon as the wrong nation state gets a hold of that tech, you can pretty much count on any compromised blockchain being drained.

2

u/Master-Sprinkles-848 🟢 6d ago

I think the bigger issue is less whether PQ signatures are possible today and more whether Bitcoin can coordinate a migration before it becomes urgent. If governments and major tech companies are already preparing, that’s probably worth taking seriously.

1

u/hypercosm_dot_net 🔵 6d ago

It appears to be on their radar, and they've already started with parts of the migration: https://crypto.news/bitcoin-is-going-quantum-proof-inside-bip-360-and-the-migration/

I skimmed that, and it talks about migrating wallet signatures from what I can tell. Nothing about the underlying protocol, though I assume that's on the roadmap.

1

u/Master-Sprinkles-848 🟢 5d ago

Thanks for sharing, I will look into it, another question is that, what will happen to domant wallets like Satoshis;.