Topic: I don't believe Quantum Computing will ever threaten Bitcoin - page 6. (Read 5478 times)

--------------
Creating a shared key over fiber? Quantum methods? But what's revolutionary here. These experiments are already 40 years old. This method is not for the average user with a device connected to a wifi point. This is for special organizations. And not at great distances. In addition, there should be a mass of photon amplifiers and other equipment on the track.

And is this just to create a shared key?
It’s easier to find an open communication channel that no one has been controlling for a long time ... no one will track an ordinary paper letter “to the grandfather’s village”, not a single hacker.

Mankind likes methods that require a ton of money and technology. This gives rise to new value. This gives rise to the consumer. This spins the economy. Well, where is the development of cryptography?

But in essence, for us, for ordinary users of cryptography, this method of technology development is similar to building a fortified fortress only for protection against one mosquito, and not for life.

It seems to me that the future is not for technological solutions in this area, but for logical ones.

In technology, humanity has long been “grazing behind”, so far an electric drone can be in autonomous flight for a limited time, measured in hundreds of minutes. Guys, this chemical method of storing electrons is already 3000 years old. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry was given for the molding of electrical power supplies, for a lithium-ion battery. Previously, for this “invention” they would only give a patent. And now the Nobel Prize. Awesome!

Do not feel the lack of development? Today everyone considers development a thinner smartphone case and they are proud of it. But this is the level of molding. Is evolution reversed?

Especially, this degradation became noticeable with the development of digital communications. Instead of coming up with new encryption methods, everyone comes up with an increase in the key length (and candidates for post-quantum systems have keys of phenomenal length), and work in the fields of huge, "astronomical" numbers that do not exist in the universe, which load our skinny smartphones. Aw, people, wake up ... There must be "human", reasonable decisions.

Great's to read OP,
This is what you think !

Now can you imagine if certains parties wants to targets someone, there is simply just nothing that he can do. Do this is not a field that discourage the using of Bitcoin !?

And here's is the question, as there's already Quantum-Proof cryptocurrencies existing.

---

What do you think of a graduated upgrade that could implement the core/network with a protocol using a second private key for an address, so the core recognise if a address is upgraded to/(have adopted the protocol), and then alow or not the task from that address. As that's would be operated gradually, from a proper adoption of the wallets owners, anybody will forgotten! 

Why is everyone discussing cryptography but not dividing the systems into symmetric and asymmetric? Not taking into account quantum computing, which today is a greater reality than this summer (https://ai.googleblog.com/2019/10/quantum-supremacy-using-programmable.html), for a cryptanalyst, any asymmetric system can be hacked. It all depends on the amount of plaintext and the corresponding code, the availability of a public key.

Sooner or later, this problem is solved mathematically, and not by exhaustive search of the code, which everyone fears. Even if the problem is not completely solved by mathematical analysis, thanks to it, the remaining options for exhaustive search are greatly reduced in comparison with the initial ones. Here is a look at the old material that has become relevant today: https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2018/09/cryptography_after_t.html This is the genius of the entire science of cryptography writes, and not the simple owner of bitcoin. Of all existing systems, only AES-256 (symmetric) remains in today's post-quantum world.

And do not forget that all systems with public and private keys are much more resource-intensive than any symmetric one. How you are going to use the post-quantum asymmetric system on a regular computer is not clear. And in blockchain technology, it’s even more incomprehensible.

To fantasize and expect ready-made solutions, to doubt the progress of computing technology, not to know that the entire blockchain is built on an unproven assumption, about the lack of a mathematical solution to the asymmetric encryption used, and not to know about the danger of elliptic cryptography based on the assumption that there are no collisions in the selected elliptical ( there are a lot of examples, including errors of standardization of these curves by NIST itself) - this is sticking your head in the sand.

Long live ostriches, the most daring birds in the world!

When considering the security impact of quantum computers, we do need to make the distinction between post-quantum cryptography, which uses classical computers to provide quantum-resistant algorithms,  and quantum cryptography, which uses quantum computers to provide quantum-resistant algorithms.

If we consider quantum computers as a means of attack, we are generally thinking about the phenomenal factoring power which can swamp traditional security measures. As we have discussed, there has been a lot of work in post-quantum cryptography to establish robust classical defences, ranging across a number of different approaches using some quite sophisticated maths, be it lattice, Lamport/Merkle sig or (deep breath) supersingular-isogeny-graph-Diffie-Hellman-key-exchange.

Some of these approaches show a lot of promise. However quantum cryptography - building fundamentally unbreakable security measures by using the laws of quantum mechanics - is for me a hugely important strategy. I say fundamentally unbreakable because the act of observation (or eavesdropping, or hacking) is an integral component in any quantum mechanical system. The observer impacts the results, as in the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment (incidentally the theoretical cat is not both alive and dead at the same time, rather it is in a superposition of the states, a probability function that only resolves upon being observed).
Any attempt to observe/hack/eavesdrop on the quantum state alters the data, and it's impossible to pull the data out and copy it, either. This is demonstrated by the no-cloning theorem.

I've already mentioned Kak's 3-stage protocol, which is entirely quantum, unlike the more commonly used approach of Quantum Key Distribution... but I'd like to go into QKD a bit here, just to demystify it a bit.

The standard terrestrial approach to QKD is essentially to send photons one-by-one down a normal fibre-optic cable. If someone tries to read (hack) the communication, then this act of observation alters the polarity of the photon, and so the recipient becomes aware of the hacker's presence. This is simple QM, it's a basic physical law that can't be bypassed. Of course you wouldn't send a whole message in this way, but it is a perfect method for establishing a shared key.

There is also a satellite approach to QKD that China is developing, which relies on quantum entanglement so that two photons both have the same physical state. Again, anyone eavesdropping disrupts the communication.

... so whilst understandably a lot of focus is on the dangers posed by attacks that exploit the properties of quantum mechanics, it is (in mainstream opinion) sometimes overlooked that those same properties can provide a phenomenal (and as we understand QM, perfect) defence.



[image sourced from this article: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/06/china-s-quantum-satellite-achieves-spooky-action-record-distance ]

This is a good explanation at a very basic level but quantum computers are much more than just a layered system but I would agree that this is probably the best way of explaining the differences between normal computers and quantum computers and  I would like to say that because of this layering system targeted attacks would be more probable than large scale attacks due to having to rework what you call the machine code. I would call these super states which tromp goes into a little detail about. The only thing that newcomers to Bitcoin need to know is quantum computers aren't the end of Bitcoin and at a basic level they are made different than to your computer at home. They are only capable of targeted attacks and Bitcoin is probably at the lower end of priorities for a potential attacker. EDSCA is not going to be a big target for someone with a quantum computer and despite the media claims Bitcoin will not be in danger for at least another 10 years unless there is some groundbreaking breakthroughs in the scene of quantum mechanics.

Computers are made with a layering system which determines what is on the computer. More layers does not necessarily mean a slower computer but in general terms when comparing a personal computer and a quantum computer it is the case. A personal computer has more layers and operates off high level programming instead of low level. Low level programming is sometimes called machine code and high level programming is called byte code. You are familiar with byte code because you use it every day. Byte code is on a operating system level and usually requires an operating system to be present. Look at windows and Ubuntu these are the operating systems which bytecode interacts with. These operating systems are designed to be a jack of all trades unlike super computers and quantum computers which excel at only a couple of things.

Just think that your computer that has these operating systems on them have useful programs like calculators and UI's and all kinds of things that help you as a daily user. However when quantum computers come into the frame they consider these programs useless. Even if a quantum computer has more powerful hardware it would still be a waste of resources to install a operating system. Instead they will use machine code and machine code is usually used for specific tasks. Your TV remote for a example as machine code and does not have a operating system. Automatic doors on a car would only have machine code. They are designed for speed in mind and to perform only a few tasks. Your tv remote flicks over channels but it cant surf the web or have a built in calculator same goes for a locking mechanism on a car it only has two jobs and that is to lock or unlock the door.

These are simple examples and ways of explaining this but this is the general idea of quantum computers vs a personal computer. A quantum computer will not have an operating system and they will be designed like your tv remote to carry out specific tasks as efficiently as possible. The biggest quantum computer development is factoring and they are extremely good at solving factoring problems but they can't calculate anything else except for what they are told to do. Combing this with the hardware of a quantum computer gives you what they are today. Qbits is a measurement of the processing power of these computers.

Quantum computers are often compared with massively (exponentially so) parallel computers.

Their states are actually superpositions of classical states, each of which has a complex amplitude, which can be thought of as a complex analogue of probability.

Unlike classical parallelism, states in superposition are NOT individually observable.
You need to orchestrate the quantum computation so that states you don't want to observe CANCEL each other in amplitude.

Only problems with a very particular structure, such as integer factorization, allow for cancellation of all but an exponentially small fraction of desirable states, i.e. states from which we can extract the problem answer.

A lot of people mention it here but how exactly is a quantum computer so good at one specific task? How are the developed differently? I have been studying quantum computers recently after the recent announcement of the Google quantum computer ground breaking qbits but whenever someone says quantum computers are only good at one specific task they never go into detail why that is true.

I would have thought that quantum computers would be good at all tasks just like a normal computer because they have better hardware than personal computers. How could that possibly have a detrimental effect on the computer if the hardware is much better?

Does it have something to do with the heat that the computer generates because of the amount of work that the hardware is putting in?

Skepticism is valid because they are the NSA but remember that not every american government related organization is bad for the development of Bitcoin or cryptocurrency. The Tor Browser project was first made by the US Navy and their goal was to create a circuit based network which was capable of operating on low latency which would provide anonymity to its users. This quickly turned into a very good project for those wanting to conceal their identity while browsing the web and expanded beyond military use. The military has probably moved away from using the tor browser project because of exit nodes showing plain data and can be used by anyone unless they have control of their own nodes and only connect to them. The point I'm trying to make despite these projects being anti government in certain areas they were still developed by organizations close to the government. The Tor Browser went against NSA's principles of wanting all the information they can on everyone just like Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies encourage anonymity.

The funding that NSA can bring will certainly help the development towards a better alternative to lamport, lattice and multivariate based cryptocurrency if it doesn't provide a better alternative its always better to have more minds contributing to a issue because other projects like lamport or does not have the funding that the NSA does will be able to learn and integrate additions that the NSA have proposed.

These would be temporary solutions. Therefore they are developing new cryptos.


edited

I want to share this article where they talk that the NSA wants to develop a cryptocurrency with quantum resistance:


Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/nsa-working-to-develop-quantum-resistant-cryptocurrency-report

It is necessary to emphasize that the development of quantum computers has always attracted my attention, and I can only imagine that by having a Quantum Computer, and this quantum resistance coin is taken, the potential that will be developed will be incredible.

I have always thought that development calls for development and innovation, the algorithms will be with much more optimal codes, and if we add the artificial intelligence that helps to continue developing the improvements in a quantum computer, bitcoin would in turn have a prolonged growth, Well, if we assume that all altcoins depend on Bitcoin directly or indirectly combined with superior technology, it could be said that the market in general would enter a higher level where the price of Bitcoin would be much higher, since people pay whatever To have security.

I was speaking in the case of a big attack, if it happens a little one its the same as you be hacked in your browser with a keylogger, that happens everyday or some guys stoling exchangers.

I think should exist some link in bitcoin.org website to complaint about transactions maybe hacked and should be marked as under investigation if we discover a padroon maybe can help to catch the bad guys.

I have never thought of the economics aspect towards how the Quantum Computers are going to be a threat towards the different kind of computing systems. I agree that the ones who can be the first customers of QC's might probably be the richest people. Addition to the people researching on that subject, they are going to be the first ones.

I know that we are far away from that reality but preventing the possible QC attacks to the network is more viable. I'm just not sure how they are going to do it because knowing the computing capabilities of QC, and it could outsmart any problems faster than normal.

Because of the issue discussed of only the wealthy elite being able to get their hands on quantum computers that are capable of threatening the algorithm Bitcoin uses its not realistic to use it for good. Especially because the easy solution would be changing to a different algorithm which would be capable of defending against a quantum computer. If someone wants to help Bitcoin against the future threat of quantum computers it would be contributing to the projects which are intending on implementing the quantum resistant algorithms or Bitcoin itself.

So are you saying that developers are going to use it for good or not? I don’t quite understand what you are trying to say. With the use of QC, you would use it to see what “type” of attacks would work on Bitcoin and how it could be prevented? (That’s the good part).

What memorandum are you talking about? Maybe you are talking about integrity of the code? Altering it would cause a lot of economical tragedy with Bitcoin. Loss in value etc.

I think time will come when it does that but we are probably not alive anymore when it happens. Maybe there would be a great change with regards how we are currently using cryptocurrencies now.

Approaching it where the problem is QC (theory only) it should be answered by the same powerful thing, QC. It’s like fighting fire with fire, but everything is digital.

We are not there yet where it’s applicable already.

When devs are getting their hands on these devices, can't a counter-defence (or attack) be introduced by them even at their understanding of 2 qubits to help figure out what type of actual attacks can destruct the memorandum code for Bitcoin? Can it be just attacking the value of Bitcoin or it will also destroy the whole economy? Considering that over 84% of BTC has already been mined, I see it to be least affecting the niche but the thing is, Bitcoin is still 'not fully, but to some extent' vulnerable to this type of *imagination* and we should prepare ourselves for a situation if occurs in near future. Why not find out a technology that can prevent us from the attacks of QC? If QC and other things were imagined and have become truth now, there must be something that can abolish their twitches and burst the bubble before it becomes too big to stop you from breathing.

And using that imagination, computers were invented. Imagine living in the 1800's; they probably imagined how they are going to talk to other people from another side Of the world? How is mathematics going to be easy? I wish there were some machine or equipment for that

Don't be so negative with things that are not yet adequately realized. It all starts with a theory and a what-if.

It's hard yet to realize since there are only two ways to do quantum computing and you need an expensive device to experiment. It needs to be in a vacuum chamber etc. The human race would get there, for sure. (unless we have destroyed our home, Earth) Lol

QC could not improve computing power.

Classical computing will always be cheaper and faster than QC.

It is very simple physics, noise ruins all and every extrapolated prediction of QC efficiency.

IMO, quantum physics is not the reality, but rather a set of very useful statistical tools.

Due to the imaginary nature of quantum physics, people easily get confused.

It's not a crack what I'm talking about, it's physically tricking the network or something like that. I doubt that it's going to work but in theory, it sounds plausible. That's why I suggested, instead of using Quantum computers to make normal computers, hashes, obsolete, why not make it more powerful using that technology? It's far ahead into the future but it's better than destroying things.

---

That's the thing, you can't. Maybe if we are talking about theories, certainly, we can but it's all a theory unless you have enough power to hack everything and Bitcoin would turn inside out and all those things that you sold for BTC, wouldn't be worth it anymore. That's only true if it happens, which is impossible to do.

We will never know unless something happens unexpectedly, knowing the will of other people just to destroy other peoples hard work, it's just the reality anymore. What we need to worry about is what hackers do with their knowledge.

With the amount of transactions bitcoin currently has >300k/day, a rollback is almost impossible. Planning a rollback and getting everyone to agree with it would take some time, and what would you do with the >300-2000k transactions that were confirmed before the rollback?
There is a lot of money moving in bitcoin. How can anyone justify cancelling than many transactions?
Imagine. You sell your car for bitcoins, wait for it to confirm hand over your car and then the next day you don't have your coins anymore 
What would that do to the reputation of bitcoin?

Maybe, if there would be a HUGE theft that would be noticed immediately, but that would have to be REALLY huge. I cant imagine such a thing happening anymore.
When a rollback was done bitcoin was a lot of smaller and there weren't as many transactions then. And the bug would have destroyed bitcoin if it had not been fixed. (someone created ridiculous amounts of new bitcoins from nothing. IF I remember correctly he created hundreds of millions of bitcoins...  so something had to be done)