Quantum computer could kill bitcoin

[seoincorporation]

I think most of people here in the forum are amazed with technology, and we have seen some technology gets obsolete, well, that could be one scenario for bitcoin. The quantum computes are on the way, and they will be really powerful. If the human create super computers that could be the end of bitcoin because with one simple command you can get all the private keys.

Code:

crunch 51 51 1234567890ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvxyz + + + -t 5@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

So, the new technology in some point will become a vulnerability for the old  technology, and developers should be one step forward to avoid this happen.

Share your point of view guys.

[cissrawk]

Its not too easy, we still don't know how powerfull it is and how long to generate all the private keys. If that too powerfull, then it can be they don't have enough power(such as electricity) to make it happen and i guess only trusted people or reputable people that can use quantum computer, and maybe bitcoin developer can collaborate with them and create better security.

Well, quantum computer still on development. Until then, bitcoin developer can think or do something about it.

[Steamtyme]

Here is one of the more recent threads that had a pretty good discussion early on. It is locked at the moment.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2561150.0

Check to find Nullius having a nice back and forth starting on Page 2.

[r1s2g3]

I am just wondering if we can put delayed login, means whether your password is correct or not, will check be checked after 60 seconds and then you need to wait for 60 seconds for a login.
Individual can wait for 60 second but QC will require 60 million second to verify 1 million possible passwords.

[Bounty_Hunter]

It's nonsense. A quantum computer simply cannot process the bitcoin algorithm and therefore cannot mine coins.

[trecore4]

I think most of people here in the forum are amazed with technology, and we have seen some technology gets obsolete, well, that could be one scenario for bitcoin. The quantum computes are on the way, and they will be really powerful. If the human create super computers that could be the end of bitcoin because with one simple command you can get all the private keys.

Code:

crunch 51 51 1234567890ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvxyz + + + -t 5@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

So, the new technology in some point will become a vulnerability for the old  technology, and developers should be one step forward to avoid this happen.

Share your point of view guys.

I am not that techie but I have got one point here to ask !

Why everyone keeps thinking that when Quantum computers will be launched they will kill the bitcoin ?

Why not think in positive ways and say that if Quantum computers come online then we can use them to Solve the complex algorithm easily and then use these computers in the MINING operations ?

This can ease all the operations and may reduce the energy consumption and thus may help to take the blockchain or crypto currencies to the next level and have them used everywhere.

Why hacking and all the shit, when it comes to the power of Quantum Computing. LOLZ.

[Hell-raiser]

I think most of people here in the forum are amazed with technology, and we have seen some technology gets obsolete, well, that could be one scenario for bitcoin. The quantum computes are on the way, and they will be really powerful. If the human create super computers that could be the end of bitcoin because with one simple command you can get all the private keys.

Code:

crunch 51 51 1234567890ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvxyz + + + -t ...

So, the new technology in some point will become a vulnerability for the old  technology, and developers should be one step forward to avoid this happen.

Share your point of view guys.

I can't say that I'm very well familiar with quantum computing or the science behind it, but as far as I know, quantum computing is only applicable to a rather narrow spectrum of tasks. Well, it seems that breaking encrypting algos falls right into its scope of problem solving, but not all encrypting algorithms are created equal. So it looks more like an urban legend or myth that such computers once they come about will render the whole cryptography irrelevant. This is obviously not the case and in reality the devil is not as black as he is painted. This is what I think. If I'm missing something or just say something wrong, you are welcome to correct me on this matter!

I don't think it will take a lot of time to change an underlying algo once it becomes "endangered".

[franky1]

to all those wondering what quantum is.
if you brush asid all the wishy washy buzzwords of super positioning. multidimensions..

its simply instead of just 1 or 0 (binary) it uses 0 1 2 3

basically in binary 0volt is 0 and 1volt is 1
in quantum its more like
0volt 0.33volt 0.66volt 1volt

and now you'll start to understand it.
those doing quantum are deciding a 'standard'. such as do they call
0volt - bin0 boolean false
0.33v - bin01 boolean maybe not
0.66v - bin10 boolean maybe so
1volt - bin1 boolean true
or some other mixture that becomes standardised for how they use a qubit

secondly they are still figuring out and deciding how many qubits to use together to standardise a qubyte
..
imagine it like morse code. decades of just monotone of . and _  and now they are realising it can be a high-pitch toned . or a low toned . and same for _
they are still trying to work out what to do with 4 options instead of 2 and then deciding how many dots and dashes represent a word.

which is why they say it will be a decade before they have a 'quantum PERSONAL computer' because they are still at the standardising what was a on of switch(binary) to now being a 4 option dimmer switch(quantum)

[franky1]

I can't say that I'm very well familiar with quantum computing or the science behind it, but as far as I know, quantum computing is only applicable to a rather narrow spectrum of tasks. Well, it seems that breaking encrypting algos falls right into its scope of problem solving,

solving binary problems such as SHA, d-wave is not that great at.
quantum is better at non binary things.

for instance. instead of just binary(2 option): on off, yes no, stay go, true false

quantum can do DNA..
0 A
1 C
2 G
4 T
and can map DNA better and recalculate it easily.

mapping
0 north
1 east
2 south
3 west
where as in binary it needs 2bits to do a single option like that
00 north
10 east
01 south
11 west

basically quantum 'bits' are only 2x efficient than binary bits when it comes to binary problems.
but quantum can be more efficient at other things non binary.

[micher143]

This has been discussed in this forum many times and we know Quantum computer won't kill Bitcoin because :
1. ECDSA which used by Bitcoin is partially quantum resistance because Public Key needed to find out Private Key and Public Key only revealed when input of an address is used. So, one-time address usage partially solve the problem.
2. Bitcoin continuously improved through both soft-fork and hard-fork, so i'm sure developer/contributor will propose another Cryptographic which is quantum resistant.
There are few existing alternative, but mostly have huge trade-off on signature size and verification time.

Yes, I agree to that. It's very doubtful that bitcoin can be destroyed easily by that new technology because we all known that bitcoin system is one of the newly high technology which is decentralized and can operate without the acknowledgement of others even by the third party. It can stand and operates with it's own system and probably it is designed with it's own system and different from others.

[Hell-raiser]

I can't say that I'm very well familiar with quantum computing or the science behind it, but as far as I know, quantum computing is only applicable to a rather narrow spectrum of tasks. Well, it seems that breaking encrypting algos falls right into its scope of problem solving,

solving binary problems such as SHA, d-wave is not that great at.
quantum is better at non binary things.

for instance. instead of just binary(2 option): on off, yes no, stay go, true false

quantum can do DNA..
0 A
1 C
2 G
4 T
and can map DNA better and recalculate it easily.

mapping
0 north
1 east
2 south
3 west
where as in binary it needs 2bits to do a single option like that
00 north
10 east
01 south
11 west

basically quantum 'bits' are only 2x efficient than binary bits when it comes to binary problems.
but quantum can be more efficient at other things non binary.

I'm not sure what to make of that. As I see it, you are just suggesting to use calculations based not on just 2 digits (binary calculations) but on a higher base (4, 8, ...). Honestly, I don't see any difference here, as whatever base you use, you can always simplify it to the binary notation without losing anything. Are you certain that your understanding of quantum computing is correct? Personally, I always thought it has more to do with using some physical phenomena (actually, quantum phenomena) to make calculations and get relevant results. In other words, you do not calculate in the usual way like 2+2 but use some quantum effects which kind of do calculations for you, and then you just write down the result.

Briefly, it is very different from using your fingers to calculate a sum, which is what "normal" computing comes down to (no matter what base you use).

[seoincorporation]

Thanks for your replies guys, after reading all of them i realized there is not a big risk at all. I was thinking a really powerful computer could bruteforce bitcoin, but looks like i was wrong, maybe that's possible but not with quantum computers, lets wait other 10 years, to see the new generation computers, maybe those ones would be the real risk. 

[Hell-raiser]

Thanks for your replies guys, after reading all of them i realized there is not a big risk at all. I was thinking a really powerful computer could bruteforce bitcoin, but looks like i was wrong, maybe that's possible but not with quantum computers, lets wait other 10 years, to see the new generation computers, maybe those ones would be the real risk. 

Quantum computing is still rather a theoretical concept than a real construct. You may hear it in the news here and there about one company or another running a few (dozen) qubits for a few seconds or minutes at best, and then people start crying about quantum computers taking over the world, not even speaking of compromising all cryptographic algos in existence today. But the reality is not as bright as news outlets pretend it to be, and what they call a quantum computer may be more like an abacus when compared to a real one. Okay, let that be a calculator if you are not happy with my example.

[JimboToronto]

The same hashing algorithm (SHA256) used to encrypt Bitcoin is also used by the banks and military.

If it's cracked by quantum computers, Bitcoin is the least of our worries.

[seoincorporation]

The same hashing algorithm (SHA256) used to encrypt Bitcoin is also used by the banks and military.

If it's cracked by quantum computers, Bitcoin is the least of our worries.

As you say, all of them use SHA256, but lets remember SHA1 was already vulned, now we use sha256 and feel secure, but there are some more complex SHA's now days, we have SHA512 and SHA3, and they was made for the moment that some one can exploit SHA256 just like it happened with SHA1.

Let me leave a nice article here about what i'm talking about:
https://www.coindesk.com/who-broke-the-sha1-algorithm-and-what-does-it-mean-for-bitcoin/

[HeXecutor]

Yes ... actually a really difficult question. Rather not difficult and unpleasant ... Quat computer is really dangerous for bitcoin ... and not only for this. And the worst thing is that now you can not do anything to save bitcoin ... this thing will be damn powerful.
So it remains only with horror to expect how the events will unfold in the near future ...

[franky1]

I'm not sure what to make of that. As I see it, you are just suggesting to use calculations based not on just 2 digits (binary calculations) but on a higher base (4, 8, ...). Honestly, I don't see any difference here, as whatever base you use, you can always simplify it to the binary notation without losing anything. Are you certain that your understanding of quantum computing is correct? Personally, I always thought it has more to do with using some physical phenomena (actually, quantum phenomena) to make calculations and get relevant results. In other words, you do not calculate in the usual way like 2+2 but use some quantum effects which kind of do calculations for you, and then you just write down the result.

Briefly, it is very different from using your fingers to calculate a sum, which is what "normal" computing comes down to (no matter what base you use).

maybe i oversimplified it for too simple an explanation.. kinda hard to ELI-5

and your right you can simplyfy the END RESULT base down. thats why a one qubit can be converted to 2bits.
thats IF you were to use quantum for a one directional binary problem.
 
hense why doing a hex/bin SHA problem it requires 4bits per hex but only 2qubits per hex. so "quantum" is only 2x more efficient at doing binary/hex problems.

but a binary transistor is only ever a 2base. only ever has been a 2 base. so its never been a 4 or 8 base.

as for the "physical phenomena" inside a transistor. well that just stores a value. HOW its stores it is NOT important. its the transportation inbetween transistors. along the mainboard/wires. as that is still electric.

imagine binary as 1 direction (1dimensional) stay still or go forward
->[]->1
so 0 is do nothing and 1 is go forward


then qubits are 3 directions (3 dimensions) stay still or go forward or left or right
    2
    |
->[]->1
    |
    3
so now a 0 is still do nothing. a 1 could be go forward, 2 is go left 3 is go right

or they could decide to stay with one dimension but where
0 do nothing
1 switch on transistor
2 do nothing at second transistor
3 switch on 2nd transistor
(which takes 1qubit to get to tell the second transistor, or 2 bits to achieve same result)
but thats just a waste of possible utility...

they are still trying to standardise how the 'switch' of a transister moves onto the next. because it needs standardisation (protocol) so that they can then mass produce consumer PC's that will then know what to do when being given quantum code

so they have the hardware but still deciding what to do with it.
at the moment they are not going for the one dimension where 3= switch on 2nd transistor. they are instead playing with go left or right (3 dimension)

sticking with 1 dimension where doing binary problems is limited.. just to be able to do 4base and convert it down to 2 base is a waste..
but multi option, dimension, choice, direction, vector problems can be easily handled which binary systems couldnt really handle opens up a whole new minefield of oppertunity. rather than just 2x transistor efficiency.
imagine it like this
for century you had one bit controling
-[]-
now you can adjust voltage of one qubit to either control
-[]-[]   (limited utility as binary could do same with 2bits)
or
      /[]
-[]Ξ-[]  (imagine the posibilities)
      \[]

[spirali]

Why not think in positive ways and say that if Quantum computers come online then we can use them to Solve the complex algorithm easily and then use these computers in the MINING operations ?

This can ease all the operations and may reduce the energy consumption and thus may help to take the blockchain or crypto currencies to the next level and have them used everywhere.

I think you are confused. More hashing power would not increase the efficiency of the network. To make it simple, if your laptop was the only computer mining on the network, it would find all blocks and thus validate all transactions of the network. It wouldn't be decentralized at all but it would work. We would have a new block every 10 minutes anyway as the difficulty would be adjusted to a ridiculously low level.

Mining is a competition and the incentive is the block reward. So, if a miner comes with a new solution which is more efficient (like what happened with ASIC's), the other miners will need to adopt the same solution to stay in the race. But if GPU's, FPGA's and ASIC's were never used for mining we would still be using CPU's and the network would be perfectly fine (actually, even better because more decentralized...)

[bitcoindusts]

So, the new technology in some point will become a vulnerability for the old  technology, and developers should be one step forward to avoid this happen.

I sincerely believe that technology is not created to squash another, nor destroy it. Yes, i am not discounting the fact that quantum computing might break bitcoin's security but i doubt it will be intended to do so. Besides, there's a lot of intelligence poured unto the security dynamics of bitcoin that it was able to convince tech experts that it is nearly hack proof. The cryptographic keys it utilizes are not really of a simple matter otherwise, it would have not survived this much time. People are crazy smart and greedy, there were certainly a lot of attempts to decrypt bitcoin wallets and even attack on the blockchain was surely tried but none succeeded. I'm sure even a quantum computer could not help as the bitcoin core continues to develop and address vulnerabilities such as what you have noted.

[seoincorporation]

So, the new technology in some point will become a vulnerability for the old  technology, and developers should be one step forward to avoid this happen.

I sincerely believe that technology is not created to squash another, nor destroy it. Yes, i am not discounting the fact that quantum computing might break bitcoin's security but i doubt it will be intended to do so. Besides, there's a lot of intelligence poured unto the security dynamics of bitcoin that it was able to convince tech experts that it is nearly hack proof. The cryptographic keys it utilizes are not really of a simple matter otherwise, it would have not survived this much time. People are crazy smart and greedy, there were certainly a lot of attempts to decrypt bitcoin wallets and even attack on the blockchain was surely tried but none succeeded. I'm sure even a quantum computer could not help as the bitcoin core continues to develop and address vulnerabilities such as what you have noted.

Maybe squash other other technology is not the goal, the goal was just to make a super powerful computer to solve Genetics problems or Artificial Neuronal Networks, but lets remember bitcoin has been target of brute force attacks in the past, and if those hackers don't brute force the full network was because the hardware doesn't allow them to do it, but once we have the hardware to do it, then will be a big vulnerability.

Let's imagine one day we wake up and we see all the bitcoins moving to the same addy, in that scenario we can be sure some one already import all the privatekeys, and not even a fork can save us from that because all the addys would be already compromised.