I see lot of technical point discussed here about the safety of money in bank vs vulnerability in their system too. Anyway bank and financial institution will spend money or other measure to safeguard money.
But what now concern s me that QC just make any online system ( that keep password) very vulnerable until they don't put QC resistant algorithm. With current price of QC , I think these algorithm will be sold in much premium cost. It means securing information in any online system will be going to most expensive way. Will be going back to eras of pre 1990s then.
Topic: Quantum Computing and Bitcoin (Read 1113 times)
Security tokens are a PKI derivative device which is hypothetically broken by QC.
2َّFA wouldn't be helpful. It is about convincing the bank that I'm online but doesn't prove anything about the actual transaction I made because it doesn't fix the deniability problem. Without secure asymmetric cryptography there is no way, absolutely no way to have e-commerce because any transaction would be eligible to be claimed as void in courts if the sender wishes to.
I think there is a confusion that should be resolved once forever: Electronic signatures like EDCSA are not used to convince banks or other service providers about authenticity of their users, they are used to resolve disputes between the two parties (users vs banks/services) in courts.
2َّFA wouldn't be helpful. It is about convincing the bank that I'm online but doesn't prove anything about the actual transaction I made because it doesn't fix the deniability problem. Without secure asymmetric cryptography there is no way, absolutely no way to have e-commerce because any transaction would be eligible to be claimed as void in courts if the sender wishes to.
I think there is a confusion that should be resolved once forever: Electronic signatures like EDCSA are not used to convince banks or other service providers about authenticity of their users, they are used to resolve disputes between the two parties (users vs banks/services) in courts.
CMIIW, but assuming hardware 2FA/security token is 100% offline, handed by banks to user directly and assuming the server is secure, public key leakage shouldn't be possible which makes it's not broken against QC.
For the token to be useful bank should be able to verify the signature against user's public key so it has access to the key. Suppose I claim a refund for a transaction that is not refundable, arguing in a court like this:
"Having access to my public key, my bank has cracked my private key using heir QC facility and have forged the transaction on behalf of me"
Obviously, the court would urge the bank to compensate my damages besides announcing the transaction void.
Electronic signature is the back bone of e-commerce and it would collapse totally once ECDSA becomes vulnerable to QC or any other technology and centralization won't help ever.
2. Bank can force customers to use Hardware 2FA (sometimes it's called security token) for all transaction2َّFA wouldn't be helpful. It is about convincing the bank that I'm online but doesn't prove anything about the actual transaction I made because it doesn't fix the deniability problem. Without secure asymmetric cryptography there is no way, absolutely no way to have e-commerce because any transaction would be eligible to be claimed as void in courts if the sender wishes to.
I think there is a confusion that should be resolved once forever: Electronic signatures like EDCSA are not used to convince banks or other service providers about authenticity of their users, they are used to resolve disputes between the two parties (users vs banks/services) in courts.
If Quantum Computing is released into the wild and starts to attack bitcoin , what measures would we see to mitigate these attacks?
A few lines of code would strengthen the resistance, it is something we as a community would have to keep a keen eye on to mitigate risk before wallets are compromised etc - but if quantum is unlocked in a true way the world has more worries than crypto tbh. Like global mayhem if used by bad actors
Just wondering why somebody having QC will like to attack bitcoin, when there is so much Fiat lying in banks ?
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
as ETFBitcon mentioned above, the Banking system is centralized and roll-backing transactions are very legitimate procedures that could take place based on identified circumstances. imagine a credit card owner that gets hurt by a QC, then its owner could call her bank and report the problem and ask for roll-back.
AND centralized systems:
1. could simply equip by 2-factor authentication flows
2. do not let their routines be available for brute-forcing
we all know that an internet banking system only allows e.g. 3 or 5 unsuccessful try for login routine, otherwise they block a user account. such routines couldn't exist in decentralized architectures. attacking the HTTPS protocol will be trivial too, because the 2-factor auths that utilize advanced OTP generators could prevent any kinds of MITM attacks.
Electronic signature is the back bone of e-commerce and it would collapse totally once ECDSA becomes vulnerable to QC or any other technology and centralization won't help ever.
totally true, BUT a centralized system like banking system could simply publish an announcement about abandoning e-signs (for a while) and ask its customers for get back to the traditional paper-based methods. I mean they that several alternatives, but a crypto only could survive in virtual world.
Just wondering why somebody having QC will like to attack bitcoin, when there is so much Fiat lying in banks ?
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
as ETFBitcon mentioned above, the Banking system is centralized and roll-backing transactions are very legitimate procedures that could take place based on identified circumstances. imagine a credit card owner that gets hurt by a QC, then its owner could call her bank and report the problem and ask for roll-back.
AND centralized systems:
1. could simply equip by 2-factor authentication flows
2. do not let their routines be available for brute-forcing
we all know that an internet banking system only allows e.g. 3 or 5 unsuccessful try for login routine, otherwise they block a user account. such routines couldn't exist in decentralized architectures. attacking the HTTPS protocol will be trivial too, because the 2-factor auths that utilize advanced OTP generators could prevent any kinds of MITM attacks.
Electronic signature is the back bone of e-commerce and it would collapse totally once ECDSA becomes vulnerable to QC or any other technology and centralization won't help ever.
totally true, BUT a centralized system like banking system could simply publish an announcement about abandoning e-signs (for a while) and ask its customers for get back to the traditional paper-based methods. I mean they that several alternatives, but a crypto only could survive in virtual world.
Just wondering why somebody having QC will like to attack bitcoin, when there is so much Fiat lying in banks ?
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
as ETFBitcon mentioned above, the Banking system is centralized and roll-backing transactions are very legitimate procedures that could take place based on identified circumstances. imagine a credit card owner that gets hurt by a QC, then its owner could call her bank and report the problem and ask for roll-back.
AND centralized systems:
1. could simply equip by 2-factor authentication flows
2. do not let their routines be available for brute-forcing
we all know that an internet banking system only allows e.g. 3 or 5 unsuccessful try for login routine, otherwise they block a user account. such routines couldn't exist in decentralized architectures. attacking the HTTPS protocol will be trivial too, because the 2-factor auths that utilize advanced OTP generators could prevent any kinds of MITM attacks.
Electronic signature is the back bone of e-commerce and it would collapse totally once ECDSA becomes vulnerable to QC or any other technology and centralization won't help ever.
The basic property of asymmetric encryption is not used to keep customers safe against adversaries and intruders it is used to keep them both safe and responsible against service providers like banks.
Suppose I could convince a court about my bank having access to QC computing power enough to extract my ECDSA private key from my pub key (which it has access to) I would announce void any transaction that I wish and reclaim my founds. Bank has enough time and resources to break my key and forge transactions on behalf of me and it is why e-commerce will collapse a very long time before bitcoin. In the latter case adversaries should have access to QC power enough to do the job in few minutes that a txn is pending.
Just wondering why somebody having QC will like to attack bitcoin, when there is so much Fiat lying in banks ?
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
as ETFBitcon mentioned above, the Banking system is centralized and roll-backing transactions are very legitimate procedures that could take place based on identified circumstances. imagine a credit card owner that gets hurt by a QC, then its owner could call her bank and report the problem and ask for roll-back.
AND centralized systems:
1. could simply equip by 2-factor authentication flows
2. do not let their routines be available for brute-forcing
we all know that an internet banking system only allows e.g. 3 or 5 unsuccessful try for login routine, otherwise they block a user account. such routines couldn't implement in decentralized architectures. attacking the HTTPS protocol will be trivial too, because the 2-factor auths that utilize advanced OTP generators could prevent any kinds of MITM attacks.
Just wondering why somebody having QC will like to attack bitcoin, when there is so much Fiat lying in banks ?
Don't you think that fiat in bank will be the first target before they will think of brute forcing bitcoin wallets.
IBM just released a new quantum computer, but it will still take a few years before applications can use its full potential.
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
Wake me up when they release 3000 qubit QC.
See you in 2050.
there are already 100 qubit boxes, and rumors of 500 qubit at military/goverment facilities in China.
That wakeup call may come sooner than you think
So what about this:
50 Qubit onsale online
https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/09/this-is-what-a-50-qubit-quantum-computer-looks-like/?guccounter=1
D-Wave claims to have 2000 Qubit
https://www.dwavesys.com/quantum-computing
Google had 75 qubit 10 months ago
https://thenextweb.com/artificial-intelligence/2018/03/06/google-reclaims-quantum-computer-crown-with-72-qubit-processor/
Rigetti has 128 qubit chip
https://medium.com/rigetti/the-rigetti-128-qubit-chip-and-what-it-means-for-quantum-df757d1b71ea
Still think its gonna take several decades?
Guess NSA has one tooo...
/KX
D-wave access is costly. Try their Leap account. You get 1 min/month of free QPU time. Commercial access is $2000/hr/month.
I tried their 'dwave' SDK SPI, no solvers were available for the supplied endpoint and my API token. Pretty useless.
Smoke and mirrors if you ask me.
Try it for yourself: https://cloud.dwavesys.com/leap/
It is not something you can buy on newegg.com and use it.
Bitcoin will be the least of the world's concerns if Quantum computers start rolling out within the next few decades. Banks, credit cards, the internet itself will be in trouble.
Plus I found this on Twitter, https://twitter.com/jsmith_crypto/status/1082101810456920065
Read it. The thread ended in, "My best guess for when Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will be practically threatened by quantum computers? 10-20 years".
Plus I found this on Twitter, https://twitter.com/jsmith_crypto/status/1082101810456920065
Read it. The thread ended in, "My best guess for when Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will be practically threatened by quantum computers? 10-20 years".
I think Bitcoin core developers are thinking already on how to change the code and make bitcoin signatures quantum proof.
And if you and others like you think that Bitcoin will be threaten by quantum computers in the next 10-20 years, then the Bitcoin developers must change the code in the next 5 years.
Yes they do. Adam Back talked about it in this inteview, https://stephanlivera.com/episode/42
He did not go into full detail or propose a roadmap on when to upgrade to a quantum-resistant signature scheme but he didn't sound that alarmed as well.
Quantum computers, as far as Bitcoin is concerned, might not be as bad as the FUD make it sound.
IBM just released a new quantum computer, but it will still take a few years before applications can use its full potential.
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
this would be a good practice to imagine a GRID of these 20 qubits is online out there and passing the calibration phase the begin mining..
Bitcoin will be the least of the world's concerns if Quantum computers start rolling out within the next few decades. Banks, credit cards, the internet itself will be in trouble.
Plus I found this on Twitter, https://twitter.com/jsmith_crypto/status/1082101810456920065
Read it. The thread ended in, "My best guess for when Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will be practically threatened by quantum computers? 10-20 years".
Plus I found this on Twitter, https://twitter.com/jsmith_crypto/status/1082101810456920065
Read it. The thread ended in, "My best guess for when Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will be practically threatened by quantum computers? 10-20 years".
I think Bitcoin core developers are thinking already on how to change the code and make bitcoin signatures quantum proof.
And if you and others like you think that Bitcoin will be threaten by quantum computers in the next 10-20 years, then the Bitcoin developers must change the code in the next 5 years.
bitcoin is the last system, sensitive mission critical system I mean, which would suffer from QC, you guys take your concerns to bankers for the starter, then come back to my grand, grand sons in like half a century later and give them heads up about bitcoin unconfirmed transactions with disclosed "old fashioned" pub keys that are subject to QC attack.
Personally I think it takes much longer for QC to grow enough to be able to break an ECDSA 256 bit cryptography in like 5 minutes (expected confirmation time) and it is just one heavy txn.
Personally I think it takes much longer for QC to grow enough to be able to break an ECDSA 256 bit cryptography in like 5 minutes (expected confirmation time) and it is just one heavy txn.
It will get there eventually but we are a great way off of it coming a problem and by the time quantum computers that are capable of disrupting the ECDSA most modern technologies will have moved onto another system which is quantum resistant. Quantum resistant systems already exist so its as simple as implementing one which benefits Bitcoin more.
bitcoin is the last system, sensitive mission critical system I mean, which would suffer from QC, you guys take your concerns to bankers for the starter, then come back to my grand, grand sons in like half a century later and give them heads up about bitcoin unconfirmed transactions with disclosed "old fashioned" pub keys that are subject to QC attack.
Personally I think it takes much longer for QC to grow enough to be able to break an ECDSA 256 bit cryptography in like 5 minutes (expected confirmation time) and it is just one heavy txn.
Personally I think it takes much longer for QC to grow enough to be able to break an ECDSA 256 bit cryptography in like 5 minutes (expected confirmation time) and it is just one heavy txn.
IBM just released a new quantum computer, but it will still take a few years before applications can use its full potential.
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
Wake me up when they release 3000 qubit QC.
See you in 2050.
there are already 100 qubit boxes, and rumors of 500 qubit at military/goverment facilities in China.
That wakeup call may come sooner than you think
So what about this:
50 Qubit onsale online
https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/09/this-is-what-a-50-qubit-quantum-computer-looks-like/?guccounter=1
D-Wave claims to have 2000 Qubit
https://www.dwavesys.com/quantum-computing
Google had 75 qubit 10 months ago
https://thenextweb.com/artificial-intelligence/2018/03/06/google-reclaims-quantum-computer-crown-with-72-qubit-processor/
Rigetti has 128 qubit chip
https://medium.com/rigetti/the-rigetti-128-qubit-chip-and-what-it-means-for-quantum-df757d1b71ea
Still think its gonna take several decades?
Guess NSA has one tooo...
/KX
You forgot NASA
IBM just released a new quantum computer, but it will still take a few years before applications can use its full potential.
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
Wake me up when they release 3000 qubit QC.
See you in 2050.
there are already 100 qubit boxes, and rumors of 500 qubit at military/goverment facilities in China.
That wakeup call may come sooner than you think
So what about this:
50 Qubit onsale online
https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/09/this-is-what-a-50-qubit-quantum-computer-looks-like/?guccounter=1
D-Wave claims to have 2000 Qubit
https://www.dwavesys.com/quantum-computing
Google had 75 qubit 10 months ago
https://thenextweb.com/artificial-intelligence/2018/03/06/google-reclaims-quantum-computer-crown-with-72-qubit-processor/
Rigetti has 128 qubit chip
https://medium.com/rigetti/the-rigetti-128-qubit-chip-and-what-it-means-for-quantum-df757d1b71ea
Still think its gonna take several decades?
Guess NSA has one tooo...
/KX
Bitcoin will be the least of the world's concerns if Quantum computers start rolling out within the next few decades. Banks, credit cards, the internet itself will be in trouble.
Plus I found this on Twitter, https://twitter.com/jsmith_crypto/status/1082101810456920065
Read it. The thread ended in, "My best guess for when Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will be practically threatened by quantum computers? 10-20 years".
Plus I found this on Twitter, https://twitter.com/jsmith_crypto/status/1082101810456920065
Read it. The thread ended in, "My best guess for when Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will be practically threatened by quantum computers? 10-20 years".
IBM just released a new quantum computer, but it will still take a few years before applications can use its full potential.
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
Wake me up when they release 3000 qubit QC.
See you in 2050.
there are already 100 qubit boxes, and rumors of 500 qubit at military/goverment facilities in China.
That wakeup call may come sooner than you think
IBM just released a new quantum computer, but it will still take a few years before applications can use its full potential.
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
See press release here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/01/08/ibm-q-system-one-quantum-computer/
its 20 qubit
//Andre
Wake me up when they release 3000 qubit QC.
See you in 2050.
there are already 100 qubit boxes, and rumors of 500 qubit at military/goverment facilities in China.
That wakeup call may come sooner than you think
/KX
Jump to: