This #asknostr won’t be for everyone.

It’s targted to the super geeks out there!

In particular any #Cybersecurity #cypherpunk #Cryptography experts.

(For context I’m a former IT Director so I’m not completely ignorant, just I excelled at leading at people and teams while being able to get my hands dirty enough to implement vision coming down from the C-Suite at 30k feet.)

#asknostr

I recall reading research on Quantum Computing almost 20 years ago. And if I was reading it then, we know it was in development prior to that.

Recently I saw a brief documentary on IBM’s Quantum 2 computer (R&D Lab).

One of the things mentioned is it’s potential (not yet realized but expected by 2035) ability to decrypt in seconds due to the super position state of Qubits.

As such, this has a real conflict with #privacy and even potential impacts for #bitcoin #btc and other #proofofwork (for example $KAS #KAS #KASPA comes to mind with its algo prepped for Optical Computing… and perhaps Monero and another #pow )

But even #nostr can be impacted.

My question:

1. Is there any future proof, Quantum Computing resistant encryption out there or in development?

2. If in the #future Qubits can hold a super position long enough to decrypt, how might we combat that?

(I guess that’s the same question as Q1…but in my mind we have to re-envision the #math …the approach to #encryption once optical computing is mainstream and especially controlled by nation states which is what it is at this point as most “world leaders” view it as a strategic national #security imperative which is why they are heavily researching it)

—-

My point being, I’m interested in this conversation and perhaps some of you experts in this field can point me to where that convo is occurring.

Encryption and hashing are two different things. Lots of hashing is quantum resistant. Ever wonder why bitcoin public keys are hashed into addresses?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

part of the purpose of doing that is the public key of a UTXO is not revealed until it's spent, this requires a different signature construction where you find the key by verifying the signature against the txid (hash) rather than having the key and verifying it validates against the signature (like bip-340 schnorr signatures)

essentially this means the cat is out of the bag before anyone knows who had the bag

Because your public key isn’t revealed until you spend, quantum computers can’t just hack away at your public key at their leisure. If your transaction will be in the next block, there’s a time limit on finding the private key.

Fair point,

But the claim of quantum computing is what would take the current (best) super computer thousands of years to brute force, qubits can do in mere seconds.

If it takes #bitcoin 10 mins to first confirmation…that is a lot of seconds gone by.

Thanks for the reply! I came across this article and read it: https://www.thesslstore.com/blog/difference-encryption-hashing-salting/

From my IT Director days I understand the concepts and the theory that hashing is quantum resistant. I suppose that’s because the hashing is comparing authenticity vs actual data?

However like the article points out, even Google broke SHA-1

Theoretically SHA-2(56) is significantly less hackable…but if “256 bit encryption” becomes vulnerable via Quantum Computing, why wouldn’t 256 bit hashing also be vulnerable?