Is quantum computing threat to Bitcoin ?

[Traxo]

what could be the best option to stop such attacks which will have the power end up an era started to promote anonymity?  

Anonymity isn't really the killer app of permissionless, trustless ledgers.
They generally disrupt top-down control, gate-keepers, and rent-seeking parasites in many ways.

The page of the Iota whitepaper which @anonymint cited explains that Iota mitigated the vulnerability in their (flawed) DAG design by making the proof-of-work difficulty very low.
But such a low difficulty in a blockchain consensus system would make the block period so fast relative to the network synchrony that
the orphan rate would skyrocket and the chain would no longer converge on a longest chain and/or attacking it would become much easier.

Yet the principle Iota employed could perhaps be applied to a different design that employed some sort of DAG that is not flawed. For example, @anonymint has been researching such designs.

Possibly some non-proof-of-work consensus system could be found that doesn't suffer from the nothing-at-stake vulnerability but that seems unlikely.

If I am not mistaken, perhaps the EquiHash in Zcash had some quantum computing resistance,
but it seemed to have some other flaws, but the details are not fresh in mind at the moment.

I presume that mathematically it must be possible to design a proof-of-work system which is quantum computing resistant. But haven't delved into it.

Mircea Popescu is working on a proof-of-work which is ASIC-resistant but don't know if it would be quantum computing resistant.
My concern is it may introduce a DoS vulnerability because the validator doesn't have a deterministic bound on computation.

[KobbyC]

Yes, Quantum computing is a threat to bitcoin. Quantum computers are so powerful and really fast and we shouldn't underrate it.
However a crucial feature of Bitcoin is its security. The features Bitcoin uses to secure itself can be solved by a quantum computer.
And Bitcoin is working around this to put everything in place in the future to come.

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

Yes, Quantum computing is a threat to bitcoin. Quantum computers are so powerful and really fast and we shouldn't underrate it.
However a crucial feature of Bitcoin is its security. The features Bitcoin uses to secure itself can be solved by a quantum computer.
And Bitcoin is working around this to put everything in place in the future to come.

I guess we must be not worried about that it will be happen in our lives =) And cryptographic algorithms can be also updated till that moment

[Traxo]

You'll excuse the intrusion into the semi-troll slant of the current conversation, but here's something just published that backs an earlier paper refuting the threat of quantum computing to Bitcoin: https://www.aier.org/article/threat-bitcoin-quantum-computing

The paper referenced: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1710.10377.pdf

For another slant...
and I don't understand how any slant which doesn't attack other members of this forum can be considering trolling...
a free exchange of ideas is not trolling.

That paper makes projections about the timing and quantity of qubits that will be available in the world based on what is currently known by the pawns in public academia.
We must look instead to the queens and kings on the chessboard.

The Manhatten Project exemplified that when national security is at stake, governments can mount intensive capital resources to accelerate and focus development of a key technology.
When Bitcoin is the international reserve currency with a $500 trillion marketcap 20 years from now, there will be a huge payoff for the Zionists if they can complete their destiny as preordained in Revelation where all wealth/control will become concentrated on the hill in Jerusalem.
Presumably they will make the necessary investments.
They will already control all ASIC mining because they control the very high capex fabs.

The Chinese recently made an advance in quantum communication encryption insuring that a man-in-the-middle must destroy the information when attempting to read it:

https://www.insidescience.org/news/china-leader-quantum-communications

I'm not implying that the sober assessment isn't worthy. I'm just noting that it shouldn't be taken as 100% certain gospel.

I do not think we should be complacent about trying to eliminate the threat from quantum computing.

Such effort must be open source and it must be widely supported, otherwise those who are successfully working towards such might conveniently die in "accidents".

However, in the past @anonymint thought quantum computer would never likely be any faster on Grover’s algorithm than classical computers with parallel memory tables where he cited a paper by Daniel Berstein, but perhaps that is only until you meet the state.

[buwaytress]

That paper makes projections about the timing and quantity of qubits that will be available in the world based on what is currently known by the pawns in public academia.
We must look instead to the queens and kings on the chessboard.

The Manhatten Project exemplified that when national security is at stake, governments can mount intensive capital resources to accelerate and focus development of a key technology.
When Bitcoin is the international reserve currency with a $500 trillion marketcap 20 years from now, there will be a huge payoff for the Zionists if they can complete their destiny as preordained in Revelation where all wealth/control will become concentrated on the hill in Jerusalem.
Presumably they will make the necessary investments.
They will already control all ASIC mining because they control the very high capex fabs.

The Chinese recently made an advance in quantum communication encryption insuring that a man-in-the-middle must destroy the information when attempting to read it:

https://www.insidescience.org/news/china-leader-quantum-communications

I'm not implying that the sober assessment isn't worthy. I'm just noting that it shouldn't be taken as 100% certain gospel.

I do not think we should be complacent about trying to eliminate the threat from quantum computing.

Such effort must be open source and it must be widely supported, otherwise those who are successfully working towards such might conveniently die in "accidents".

However, in the past @anonymint thought quantum computer would never likely be any faster on Grover’s algorithm than classical computers with parallel memory tables where he cited a paper by Daniel Berstein, but perhaps that is only until you meet the state.

I don't trust academia's work in general when it comes to Bitcoin, they lack a lot of context which they refuse to understand, or add their own which they force to fit in despite obviously irrelevancy.

I agree we shouldn't underestimate the will of the state here, but I'm still confident that it no longer has the might to achieve that sort of success with an intervention, at least, not permanently. The state can always attempt to prove this wrong, however, especially when faced with its own survival.

For another slant...
and I don't understand how any slant which doesn't attack other members of this forum can be considering trolling...
a free exchange of ideas is not trolling.

Never mind about what I thought then, just my take on someone trying to draw someone else into an argument on who's who and who's reading this... you don't need to prove anything to anyone trying to draw you into that.

[ir.hn]

It is about as big of a risk as people teleporting into bank safes to rob them 

[Traxo]

It is about as big of a risk as people teleporting into bank safes to rob them 

Isn't that what everyone (including @gmaxwell as he admitted) thought about the likelihood of someone solving the Byzantine Generals Problem in that way Bitcoin did.

Curious. Do you have any analysis to share or is that just your personal opinion? Just asking.

[ir.hn]

It is about as big of a risk as people teleporting into bank safes to rob them  

Isn't that what everyone (including @gmaxwell as he admitted) thought about the likelihood of someone solving the Byzantine Generals Problem in that way Bitcoin did.

Curious. Do you have any analysis to share or is that just your personal opinion? Just asking.

The technology of quantum computing is quantum entanglement, the same technology that has been used to teleport matter.  So if you can solve quantum computing and make it practical you can also make teleportation practical.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation

And while some may argue quantum teleportation only transmits information, well if you have the exact state information of every atom in your body transmitted into a bank vault you can be recreated there, then recreated back outside the safe with the loot.

So ya I think it is a very similar technology.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608252/first-object-teleported-from-earth-to-orbit/

[Traxo]

So if you can solve quantum computing and make it practical you can also make teleportation practical.

Non-sequitur. (intended in a friendly, not condescending tone)

And while some may argue quantum teleportation only transmits information, well if you have the exact state information of every atom in your body [...]

The physical body is not just composed of local information.
It is also interwined with gravity which is a macro information phenomenon:
https://steemit.com/science/@anonymint/the-golden-knowledge-age-is-rising

[HeRetiK]

And while some may argue quantum teleportation only transmits information, well if you have the exact state information of every atom in your body [...]

The physical body is not just composed of local information.
It is also interwined with gravity which is a macro information phenomenon:
https://steemit.com/science/@anonymint/the-golden-knowledge-age-is-rising

Also quantum teleportation would... you know... kill you.

Unless you're a die-hard philosophical materialist that assumes that quantum teleportation transmits information perfectly and assume that the positions of your molecules in spacetime have nothing to do with your being and are pretty sure that a clone of yourself with a perfect copy of your mind would be you as well. That is unless you alternatively assume that the I, ie. the self, is merely a mental construct anyway in which case knock yourself out! (whatever "you" and "yourself" would mean in that case)

But yes, it'd totally kill you.

(sorry for off-topic)


That being said, remember that the future applications of quantum computing is still for the most part speculative; let alone practical applications of quantum physics beyond that.

[buwaytress]

Also quantum teleportation would... you know... kill you.

Unless you're a die-hard philosophical materialist that assumes that quantum teleportation transmits information perfectly and assume that the positions of your molecules in spacetime have nothing to do with your being and are pretty sure that a clone of yourself with a perfect copy of your mind would be you as well. That is unless you alternatively assume that the I, ie. the self, is merely a mental construct anyway in which case knock yourself out! (whatever "you" and "yourself" would mean in that case)

But yes, it'd totally kill you.

(sorry for off-topic)

That being said, remember that the future applications of quantum computing is still for the most part speculative; let alone practical applications of quantum physics beyond that.

Not really off topic, because it underlines the fact that quantum is as you say, very much still in the realm of theory with very little implementation, even under laboratory conditions.

And here's another editorial that further explains Brennen's work (which I shared above) and stresses what I believe: that the threat is real, but has been far overplayed, and that current blockchain tech and iterations have a ten-year head start to improve. And improve they will.

A quote about Bitcoin: "it struck me how precise and intense is the brain trust behind this technology"

[HeRetiK]

[...]

And here's another editorial that further explains Brennen's work (which I shared above) and stresses what I believe: that the threat is real, but has been far overplayed, and that current blockchain tech and iterations have a ten-year head start to improve. And improve they will.

[...]

I completely missed the link to the "Quantum Attacks on Bitcoin" whitepaper, thanks for sharing. The 10-year-estimate provided by Brennen et al pretty much coincides with Intel's own estimate "five to seven years before the industry gets to tackling engineering-scale problems" [1], assuming that it will take another couple years to reach commercial viability after that.

[1] https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-advances-quantum-neuromorphic-computing-research/

[HappyDumper]

I do not find it threat to bitcoin.

First , Quantum Computers are not fully developed for any practical purpose.
Second, Even if they are developed, I do not think they will be available to common people. (The cost of quantum computer might be too high.)
Third, Instead of breaking the codes, might be they can be used to create more sophisticated and secure codes.

Your statement is true and probably will never try to meddle with bitcoin's security and extracting private keys. They will surely make use of quantum computers on more specific data researching about science and breakthrough some of the mysteries on galaxy like discovering another habitable planet. Even if Quantum computer will be up on the masses it'll surely cost a huge or worth millions and only a government approved agency will have it. But till now we still don't know if this will happen there's still alot of doubt about this thing but we can't leave it out freely.

[monkeydominicorobin]

Quantum computers pose a major threat to the security of our private data. So can it break bitcoin ? How vulnerable is bitcoin to it ?

Just read the Bitcoin.org's FAQ. You will not ask this question ever again.

[osasshem]

Before the taught of quantum computers, bitcoin and all other crypto currencies are encrypted and transactions cannot not be traced. If quantum computers will be a treat to bitcoin and crypto currencies, it then means it will be a treat to the entire internet and everything connected to it. And if such a machine is created, it can't be like the PCs that everyone can get or buy at anytime, it will have to be restricted and put in control by the government, monitoring everything that is been done with it, otherwise things unspeakable will be done with it.

[Crypto_Spike_Factor]

Quantum computers pose a major threat to the security of our private data. So can it break bitcoin ? How vulnerable is bitcoin to it ?

Just read the Bitcoin.org's FAQ. You will not ask this question ever again.

I can't help but laughing out loud in my mind for your comment mate. haha

[Strufmbae]

Quantum computers doesn't exist into public areas and it will be banned if there are people who tryna make it underground, it is not just a threat to cryptocurrency but it will also be a threat to cyber agencies,  so - quantum computers are used by highly secured and private organization. i.e nasa.

[The best one]

I think Yes, I agree because The most cryptographic systems are generally vulnerable to quantum computerization, including traditional bank systems. However, the quantum computers do not exist and at least will not be there recently. At the time of quantum computerization can be a serious threat to Bitcoin, the protocol can be increased to the stage of post-quantum algorithm. Because it is  importance of this update, it can be expected that this will be an important review for developers and adopted by all Bitcoin users.

[Artisanal Miner]

well there are just possibilities on paper not on hard-ground since building a successful quantum will take few more years, currently only D-Wave have quantum computer even its on its testing ground, and price is that much high that not everyone can access it,