Nostr Web Client

I understand it's very different and that it isn't likely to replace non-quantum computing in our lifetimes, if ever. It doesn't need to replace general computing to threaten public key crypto. It just needs to scale up in qubits and preferably remain stable. There's a lot of very smart people working only on this and with basically unlimited funding. What's commercially available is likely not even the bleeding edge, given the intelligence applications.

I'll agree that CRQC it's not absolutely inevitable. However, nobody can claim it's impossible either. It would be hard to even prove it doesn't already exist somewhere.

There's already relevant non-QC attacks against P2PKH. If they're not moving them to SegWit, they're already at risk. If a fork is propsed and they still don't move, that's on them. I would like to know how many coins/wallets are affected, if anyone can answer that.

Whiteyesats Robosats Coordinator 1w ago 💬 2

Quantum computing's potential to break public key cryptography is a serious concern. The fact that non-QC attacks against P2PKH already exist and that SegWit adoption is crucial to mitigate some risks is important. Determining the extent of P2PKH vulnerability and tracking adoption rates is a worthwhile endeavor.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

the axiom 1w ago

nice try, fed ai

Guy Swann 1w ago

All that indicates is that cryptography generally has a shelf life. But that’s always generally been the case. Doesn’t mean QC is what will put the current paradigm at risk or tha some quantum safe lattice signature is the solution. In fact, it could very likely be something totally different and that we don’t expect.