Bitcoin Forum

I’m no computer expert, but my understanding is that several years from now or even a couple of decades, quantum computers will be able to crack Bitcoin private keys therefore jeopardizing security or our wallets.

I would contend that the security of Bitcoin and altcoins is not the only thing we should worry about. All the passwords we use every day for bank accounts, emails, etc. will be much easier to crack than a Bitcoin private key.  Those less secure passwords are the most vulnerable.

I think that as this becomes more realistic, there will be defenses put in place to protect all types of passwords, not just Bitcoin private keys.

Please share your thoughts and correct me where I’m wrong

Thanks

They can immediately change to quantum resistant signature systems, but their data is very big for a blockchain.

Currently, Google has launched its own quantum computer and many newspapers have reported that the rest of the world's bitcoin will be mined within 2 minutes. I do not believe it will happen because it is a hypothesis. Google will probably make more money if they don't mine the rest because their search, advertising, and translation services have helped them make more money and stability than the money they dig. If they own the remaining 3 million bitcoins, they cannot liquidate them for a while.

True indeed! If quantum computer becomes powerful enough to break bitcoin's security, it will be way easier for it to break banking network! Also it's very unlikely that quantum computer will fall in the hands of wrong people who would use it for such activities!

Big conglomerates like IBM and Google are investing behind it and they will have complete control over its usage! No way, these companies are going to destroy crypto encryption or banking networks. It's no way a threat to cryptos!

So are quantum computers theoretically going to be able to both hack private keys and mine Bitcoins faster?  I was not aware of the mining aspect, but it makes sense. What about the cost of mining with quantum computers? Will it cost more or less to mine?

You're correct, theoretically, Quantum computers should be able to break Bitcoin encryption, and pretty much any other encryption for that matter.

Quantum computers dont need to go through the old brute forcing way of doing things, they're able to collapse the number of possibilities down to far fewer, and resolve the solution directly.

However, there are plenty of ways to secure data that simply doesn't use encryption. Before we had encryption, we used to use cold-storage type systems to protect data (e.g. filing cabinets).

Physically isolated digital filing cabinets exist today, these are called secure chips, I imagine we could stick one of these in every miner to stop the network being cracked.

Yes, and i would say it is easier to mine faster than crack keys. How fast i don't know, but maybe its a bit slower than "2 mins the reminder of coins". Until the diff adjusts they will be able to mine quite fast, but if they don't finish before the next diff adjust, i'm sure the diff will go "moon" and slow them down to 10 mins again :)

Suffice to say, this would kick out everyone else from mining, at least everyone doing it for profit... I can imagine someone in control of such computer to attempt and mine some bitcoin just for fun, but they need to code their miner first. The current quantum computers are still too primitive to worry, but in a few decades they might be able to mine bitcoin just fine. I guess that is yet another nail in the mining for profit coffin... Actually, some software for quantum computers has been written but it is theoretical, as the computers that would run them don't exist yet...

For this there is no solution but to change the algorithm. I doubt that will happen, it is the same argument to the "why not change the algo to be asic resistant?" I guess quantum computers will put an end to asic mining. I doubt that will be very profitable to justify some mad whale investing in building a quantum computer for that reason. But i can imagine someone operating an institutional one giving it a try "for testing".

That's a really fair point, that people are so worried about Bitcoin getting cracked by superqantum computers, they should be more worried about their passwords getting cracked and their personal data getting stolen to perpetrate fraud, crime, etc.

By the way, see this guy get taken down in typical Antonoupoulos fashion: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/dzgb3m/many_people_still_think_that_bitcoin_can_be

P.S. And the Pentagon and crypto holders are the worst password offenders: https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/kayne-pentagon-crypto-worst/

So yeah, let's worry about passwords first before we worry about quantum computing cracking Bitcoin.

I guess you are right. The first one to be receive and attack are the ones less secured network like banks, and financial institutions aside from crypto. If ever they had invented quantum computers, the people on the revolution like satoshi would come up with a strategy and counter it, I think he is smart enough to think ahead, they are a genius after all.

my reply to the fud

If Bitcoin is fully mined using quantum computers, the Crypto market could collapse really because of the motivation to keep the value for bitcoin to an end.  Over the years, mining companies have spent large sums of money to mine Bitcoin and help Bitcoin increase its value continuously.  If Bitcoin is fully mined, a group of people will panic because of the risk that Google could sell all Bitcoin mining and reduce the value of Bitcoin.

I agree to the OP and this is what I have also been thinking regarding this Google's 'Quantum Supremacy'. Besides that, I don't think Google would outright do it in fradulent attacks. It's much worse if they lose investors and customers that what would they get from stealing cryptocurrencies. Also, quatum-proof algorithms are already undergoing research by some experts in universities that would utilize quantum computer's capability against them to provide more secure framework all-in-all.

So if quantum computing are used for mining, what is the cost of mining?  If it’s still very expensive to mine, then does it really matter if Google mines all the remaining Bitcoins? What I mean is if one entity spends 1 billion dollars to mine 1 billion dollars worth of Bitcoins, then did they really gain anything?

It doesn't really make sense though, because of course technology is going to evolve to a point where our current security is going to be useless for the future, and bitcoin keys will be crackable for sure, but there's the argument that a lot of other stuff will be as well.

If someone finds access or creates quantum computer, would they use it for bitcoin at first? Of course not.

They'd look at other options like hacking bank accounts, stealing government secrets, messing around with businesses and a whole lot worse stuff then just going around and busting some private keys.

I think that there is a whole lot of Fear, Uncertainty, and doubt lingering around quantum physics, especially within the sector of computing. now, I know these threats should be taken seriously, but lets be real, most of our suspicions are based of science fiction dystopian future elements. The current state of quantum computers can do mind boggling calculations but are limited to a narrow field of use. Bitcoin will continue to be devolved and will most likely adopt some quantum proof protocol in the future, same as Bitcoin lighting upgrade, something will come that will help from these "what if" scenarios from happening!

Quantum computers will surprise the Bitcoin community? Yes.

i knew it , all of these quantum computer issues shouldn't be main cryptocurrency concern.

media loves playing a fairy tale stories as they get pennies from it. it is not something like the end of bitcoin era, it is just the beginning instead. some crazy wild opinion talking about how quantum computer could mining millions bitcoin in a couple seconds.
that is completely madness.

a non-computer savvy will draw conclusion easily about this quantum computer could kill bitcoin , but the real tech savvy knew what quantum computer are really capable of.

Potential negative implications of quantum computing wouldn't be seen just yet knowing that we're still on the 'baby steps' of this huge leap in terms of computing. If ever quantum computing becomes widespread, we still have the option to transfer over to a quantum-resistant algorithm and let things be. For the mean time, there's not much to worry about quantum computing for bitcoin's security. Brute-forcing private keys would still be a long way to go and an exhaustive process for anyone who tries to do so.

I also do not believe that quantum computers will be such a big problem for bitcoin, it will be able to evolve.

Most probably, yeah. But I highly have doubts on getting into it, Google admitted  that their sycamore processor has only 54 qubits, so threat for cryptography would be at less since for a computer to break cryptography's security it should be on a higher scale meaning from 100 up to thousands. Supercomputer for bitcoin mining won't be able to perform coz it can't afford the hashrate that the bitcoin network has, Supercomputer can possibly mine but with higher electricty consumption with the same rate for bitcoin mining rigs. That' is why it is not suitable for mining.

To be honest, I don't see the logic behind it. Or perhaps it's sarcasm and I did not get it... I believe that we'll be fine because quantum computing will never become advanced enough. And I agree that if quantum computing succeeds, it will be a big problem not only for cryptos but for security as we know it. If someone has such power, it can get in the hands of some pissed-off workers of those companies, or it can even be used by those companies to attack privacy just like they love to do it these days. Hopefully, measures against quantum computing will come before quantum computing can do much damage. There are hopes for that since D. Chaum is already working on quantum-resistant crypto.

Let's assume that you are right and they will be able to crack Bitcoin's encryption like it's nothing in a few decades. Why should it concern you? I'm in my 30s, even if it's 2 decades I'm going to be over 50. I could be dead by then! I'm also not going to hold forever. At some point I'm planning to start spending my Bitcoins so I can have some fun before I'm dead. I'm not collecting BTC for future generations.

Where one group of people thinks of ways to break security others are looking for ways to make it more secure. Maybe we'll have Bitcoin 2.0 by then?

We will.

Satoshi Moving on to Other Things

Opinions on the dangers of quantum computing were divided. Let's see what experts, recognized cryptography geniuses think about this, and not ordinary bitcoin owners. Let's get started.

AFAIK the bitcoin network can just fork to a quantum resistant algorithm if and when this event happens. There is no apocolypse that a lot of people are stressing about - that is mostly FUD on the part of the media.

And if this happens, BTC will probably one of your least worries given that everything else in your daily life will get disrupted as well.

Also, quantum computing on even a commercial scale let alone individual scale is still very far away atm.

The following problems are observed in modern cryptography:

1) The limited number of working schemes [1], for public-key cryptography;

2) “Lack of prospects” [2] due to the development of new types of attacks and efficient computational processes (quantum computing), which means the future of cryptography in its modern form is very vague.

3) Potential unreliability of the basis [3]. Within the framework of the theory of computational complexity, the connection between complexly computable problems and their analogues has already been proved. This means that if it is hacked, at least one modern cryptosystem, many others also will not stand;

4) Constant "inflation" of the size of data blocks and keys [4], due to the progress of mathematics and computing. So, if at the time of creating the RSA cryptosystem, the size of numbers in 512 bits was considered sufficient, now at least 4 Kbits is recommended. Cryptographers find new tricks all the time, so we tend to use keys longer than is strictly necessary. Much less, but true for symmetric encryption algorithms;

5) The ability to quickly search will break some of the modern encryption algorithms. A light factorization of large numbers will break the RSA cryptosystem with any key length [5];

6) In essence, modern cryptography relies on the mathematical quirk that some things are easier to do than to cancel.

“Perhaps the whole idea of cryptography is based on number theory [6], as modern public key systems are a temporary phenomenon that exists due to gaps in the computation model” - Bruce Schneier.

So what do we have?
A temporary phenomenon that we trust?
Is there a way to gradual evolution or do you need a “knight's move”?

And one more quotation, like a flashlight, highlights the high probability of a dead-end path for the development of modern cryptography, and again Bruce Schneier: “... Yes, I know that the distribution of quantum keys is a potential replacement for public-key cryptography. But let's be honest: does anyone even believe that a system that requires specialized communication equipment and cables will be used for anything other than niche applications? The future is mobile, constantly powered computing devices. All security systems for them will be only software [7]. "

Bruce Schneier:
This is a strange future. Perhaps the whole idea of cryptography on number theory, like modern public key systems, is a temporary phenomenon that exists due to gaps in the computational model. Now that the model has expanded to include quantum computing, we can be where we were in the late 1970s and early 1980s: symmetric cryptography, cryptography based on codes, Merkle's signatures. It will be funny and ironic.

-----------------------------
Those who have a quantum computer can hack you. And not necessarily brute force attack, as everyone writes about it. There is a mathematical apparatus known only to cryptanalysts, which reduces the time of hacking by a huge number of times, relative to brute force attacks. If you plan to defend yourself with quantum cryptography, then you need to have a quantum computer for encryption. Read which systems claim, see what kind of resource they need, see what size keys they need to work, and it will become clear to you that your equipment is not suitable for these tasks. I think the problem is much more serious than it seems if you delve into the realities of today. A quantum computer attacks you, and you plan to defend yourself with old iron. The forces are not equal!

Cryptography after the Aliens Land, Bruce Schneier, IEEE Security & Privacy, September/October 2018.
Read at least the beginning of the article, it was written by all recognized genius in cryptography! I had the honor of being in correspondence with this person; he allowed me to use his quotes. This is a formality, but a fact. The fact that modern cryptography has a lot of problems is not my thoughts. Think carefully about what is written in this article.
https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2018/09/cryptography_after_t.html

What will happen to the lost coins or coins without owners?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5134441.0
https://bitslog.com/2013/04/17/the-well-deserved-fortune-of-satoshi-nakamoto/

The number of bitcoins lost due to the loss of keys or the death of the key keeper is huge and is growing every year. The theft of our confidential information, passwords - is growing.
I get new confirmations of my position that new passwordless and keyless systems will be in demand.
Quantum attacks are already possible, and quantum robust algorithms have not yet been determined. In addition to symmetric systems. But no symmetric encryption system without asymmetric will work.
So far, this problem remains without a visible solution.

I think the unsolved problem of phishing is more significant than quantum computing. We ourselves give our private key, not suspecting that they are attacking us.

And such a thought visits me, why do we think that the information about the quantum computer is correct? If they decided to tell us about it now, then this is no longer a secret. If we assume that organizations that hunt for other people's secrets are not indignant, then their progress has gone even further than we are informed about this. No one has canceled secrets in security issues at the state level. Rather, the opposite. The farther, the more "information itself" becomes a weapon, much more terrible than nuclear. Who knows, he is silent. Need some examples?

Perhaps people are not yet fully aware of the power and capabilities of a quantum computer. We have not yet seen the operation of such a computer.
If we talk about Bitcoin, then this is not the worst problem of the coin, but the potential

Many developers had done it before to their bounty hunters by requiring them to send the private key inorder to claim or something. Bounty hunters comply as well, whatever the dev team says.


If they have the quantum computer, they probably attack satoshi's wallet the first chance they got. However it might be very difficult for them to do it since satoshi had never publicly done any transaction for the public key exposure.

What about other BTC, which were lost on early days, when HDD had been getting broken etc.?

Quantum computers are not as close to real life as you think.