Debunking possible threats with public keys

[PrivacyG]

Just the other day I read a news that Iran has produced the first Organoid Intelligence (that is a lab-grown brain using living human neurons) and that got me sucked into reading about OI and it is both fascinating and "brain-melting". The scientists say that OI is a million times faster and more energy efficient. And it is more suitable for adaptive biocomputing! It can learn and rewire itself which makes it excellent for finding solutions.
Can OI find the solution to ECDLP? I'd say if anything has the chance to find the solution, it is going to be OI. And then another fascinating technology called Parallelized DNA-based Computation can solve it so much faster than QC...

Anyway read up on OI if you are a fan of these advanced frontier sciences like me, but the important thing to know is that the threat is real but it is not close. That's a very important distinction. All popular cryptography algorithms that are commonly used today will become obsolete at some point as computation power grows and technologies advance (just like their predecessors did) but it won't happen overnight. It takes a lot of time and we will have enough time to migrate... hopefully.

Organoid Intelligence is for sure VERY interesting particularly due to how energy efficient it would be.  Pretty much any emerging technology vastly superior to what we know and have today would be a threat to Bitcoin.  And the fun in this is particularly that Bitcoin can also be 're wired' in ways we never thought would ever be necessary for its long term security before.

People get stuck a lot in these threats thinking it is the end of Bitcoin, the end of the World but we always fought emerging things.  I remember the days people did not even know about the importance of using HTTPS over HTTP.  Encryption also became 'the norm' only in the recent years so did E2EE.  PGP, verifying signatures of files et cetera, many of these are much more popular nowadays while before they were mainly used by Linux geeks, cryptographers, cypher punks et cetera.

It is a constant fight between the evolution of technology and keeping things secured.

[Satofan44]

Yes, exposed public keys can experience a dust attack, and there's a possible future threat for almost all exposed public keys when it's the era of quantum computers. However, a lot of research and preparation are currently working at the moment to provide a quantum resistant wallet.

Don't shitpost here, this is not true. You do not need to reveal your public key to experience a dust attack, any address that can possibly exist can be attacked with dust. It is irrelevant whether anyone actually owns the key to the address or not.

If your wallet key is exposed online then your wallet has no value, the people will own your wallet. So keeping your wallet key safe is the most important thing, remember the more secure you keep your wallet key the more secure your Bitcoin wallet will be and your assets will be safe.
So Bitcoin wallet is where you are keeping your assets for a long time, you are holding Bitcoin for a long time that is why it is necessary to keep your key safe. The most important thing in a Bitcoin wallet is the wallet key so it is best to keep it safe.

This is also false, don't shitpost in technical threads even if they are in the Bitcoin Discussion section.  There is no risk of any kind if the public key is exposed as of today, there is no such thing as a "wallet key". There is only a public key and a private key, but a "wallet key" is not a thing. Any time someone spends from an address the public key is revealed, thus any claims of danger is nonsense. Most active addresses have their public keys revealed, including the biggest exchange addresses.

No one has successfully stole bitcoin because the owner revealed their public keys. Public keys and wallet address are meant to share so people can be able to send you bitcoin.

False, while the key is public and there is no risk with that it was not designed as "meant to be shared" -- who the fuck actually shares Bitcoin public keys on a normal basis? Nobody. Learn the difference and improve your English.

Exposing your public keys does not mean there is absolutely zero risk. It’s  reduce your privacy because anybody can trace your wallet for you and your transaction history on the Blockchain.

This is also false. Nobody can trace your wallet, there is no difference whether you share 1 address or 1 individual public key corresponding to that address.

Some security experts also says that quantum computing becomes more powerful enough in the future, exposing your private keys can become more vulnerable, although that scenario has never been practical today.

This does not even make sense, you are confusing concepts again. The threat from quantum computers may come from the exposure of public keys, not private keys. Exposed private keys are a risk that has always existed.

[Lida93]

Since you have been in this crypto space have you in anyway come across an hack or brach that became successful with a bitcoin wallet using someone's public keys?

Or have you read something anywhere that says it's not safe to reveal your public keys online?
In general, are there possible threats with exposed Bitcoin public keys?

Even in the traditional banking I haven't heard of that an individual's funds was stolen from their bank account using their account number. And public address being just that for cryptocurrency wallet users I don't think it's anyway possible to steal or hack a wallet using it public address save private keys.

We read many different articles about quantum computer being able to do this year's from now but I strongly believe that the QC wouldn't be without limitations and that's how bitcoin developers would work to secure the network from advanced attack.

[notocactus]

Public key as the name suggests is meant to be public. Stick to the usual recommendation of avoiding address reuse for your privacy and you'll be golden. That's all you need to know, the rest is a rabbit hole of cutting edge technologies for computation and solving complex mathematical problems

Don't reuse address is a most common advice for privacy with Bitcoin usage and I can quickly quote some recommendations below.

https://bitcoin.org/en/protect-your-privacy

Use new addresses to receive payments

To protect your privacy, you should use a new Bitcoin address each time you receive a new payment. Additionally, you can use multiple wallets for different purposes. Doing so allows you to isolate each of your transactions in such a way that it is not possible to associate them all together. People who send you money cannot see what other Bitcoin addresses you own and what you do with them. This is probably the most important advice you should keep in mind.

https://bitcoinsecurity.org/guide/privacy/

Use a New Address Every Time

Never reuse a Bitcoin address. Your wallet generates a fresh receive address for every transaction automatically. Use it.

Address reuse lets anyone who paid you see all funds received at that address and where they went. Fresh addresses break this link.

https://bitcoiner.guide/privacy/segregate/#address-re-use

Address re-use

99% of bitcoin wallets that exist today will automatically serve you a new receive address every time the previous one receives any funds. All you need to be aware of is not sharing the same one twice with different entities as you can leak some privacy for the same reason as outlined in the example above. Remember, addresses are free and infinite.

https://blockchair.com/bitcoin/privacy-o-meter

Avoid reusing wallets
Don't send your Bitcoin change to the same address you use for sending bitcoins.