Topic: This is important for all the bitcoin community (Read 233 times)

Nobody can claim that it won't happen, of course it could happen but we need to accept the fact that it is not going to happen right away, it is going to take a while. I believe that the best case right now we have against this is quantum could be figured out, and could be used to protect it instead of attacking as well.

This is a very difficult thing in the world of computing, reaching that quantum level will be quite hard, but the reality is that when it's first reached, and something has that kind of power, then I wouldn't really be shocked about it at all, it would be quite good and I would agree that it is going to be a risk for all of us, hope that it doesn't do anything, but we can't all quit just because of that potential.

the magic is magical. its called economics
if it costs alot to secure/acquire something. then people wil want to sell it for alot. cost high=price high

however the PoS coins saying they can create coins cheap.. will remain cheap.
with cheap weak security. causes less desire to want to hold wealth in it. this less demand. thus less price..
PoS goes against the natural magic of economics. which is why they fail.

if gold was able to be mined in everyones back yard for $1 of labour and a spoon and coffee filter. gold would not be selling for $1700. instead it would be selling for about $2 on the markets.

golds actual underlying mining cost is about $900+ because it actually costs atleast $900/ounce for the labour, diesel sluice machines.

now here is the thing. with diesel prices going up. gold miners are going to be looking to only mine land that can net them XXX ounces a season to cover their costs. if their prospecting reveals land doesnt measure up to certain thresholds to break even. they just wont mine it..
meaning less gold in the markets.

ofcourse market influence would put pressure onto raising the price due to lack of supply for the next season. to try to entice miners back into mining low yield land due to ounce price increases.. but there is the market limit where manufacturers just refuse to pay high prices for materials to make products. as it just makes people not want to buy products if the product price is too high.

bitcion manages to stay in a good value window..
there was reason why bitcoin did not go over $70k
(because japan for instand is the most expensive region on the planet to mine. with a cost last uear of ~$70k a coin.) meaning no one would easily happily buy a coin for more then $70k if they could mine it cheaper themselves at home. so yea no one would have bought btc for $90k last year. (as proven)

bitcoins economics are magic. they work. bitcoin sits happily in its value window and the prices bounce up and down within that window of value perfectly.

other coins trying to play the opposite, which just doesnt play well and doesnt work out well..
.. you will soon learn this when ethereum 'detonates' to PoS where the cost to mine a block(2eth) drops from over $2k down to just a few dollars)
where by, having the less security of PoS due to most exchanging holding most of the stake. causes those exchanges to be the central controllers of ethereum transaction block collating and confirming
watch for the eth price to tank when it flips to Pos

@pooya87, it is a method that obviously works, at least judging by the number of new alts that appear every day with some revolutionary solutions that are xxx times more efficient, cheaper, and more useful than Bitcoin. No one is wondering how it is that Bitcoin, despite all these new and great projects, is still at the top, whether it's price, trust, or security - it must be some kind of Satoshi magic

You are using buzzwords that you don't even understand the meaning of.

HAHA. It always comes down to this.
- Step one: create an imaginary problem using a lot of buzzwords
- Step two: hope that people don't understand the truth about it
- Step three: create a shitcoin that pretend to solve that imaginary problem
- Step four: make profit by dumping after the pump

quantum can be heavily more efficient at solving puzzles than binary.
(especially puzzles not designed to be understood by binary systems)
but here is the thing. the solution the quantum system comes up with has to follow the binary rules for a binary system to accept the answer.
which limits the scope of what quantum could do..

..
here is a very simplistic example

imagine binary is a route planner that only knows 2 directions  forward and right
quantum can go forward back left and right.
so in binary knowing a starting point(D3) and having a route of forward right, forward, right, forward, right. gets to the destination. (C3)
F        
E        >>
D       ^ v
C       < v
B  
A  1 2 3 4
which can be checked.
if you know the destination(C3) and were given the route you can play it backwards to find the start point(D3)..

however
if quantum wanted to get from C3 to D3 by going either
back 1
or
left left left

a binary system would reject that route.. afterall "what is 'left' "  a binary system would say. . "i do not understand "left" command"
yes quantum could spend time making lots of route options involving only forward and right options. and find many paths.. but that is limiting quantum to the binary puzzle rules. and so its efficiency in finding a faster route or finding a route faster than a binary system brute forcing routes is limited

Same thing about quantum computing we've been discussing for at least 3 years now. Again, do your own research before you start panicking about sha 256 not being enough to protect your investment.

People keep talking about quantum computers but there's actually no proof of their ability to break existing banking encryption. What's there to stop these scientists from breaking into the federal reserve just to show they can? I think we'll hear about real uses of quantum computing long before someone teaches these computers how to break bitcoin's encryption.

you talk about brute forcing the blockchain where a situation may come up to milestone the network and change the mining algo..

bitcoins decentralised nature of the blockdata is not where someone can ever just delete a transaction out of a block where the change of the hashes are not spotted and rejected.
not unless they were able to simultaneously change every full node users software to miscalculate the hash maths that is based on the data..

the only option is to brute force a block. by this it means go back to earlier blocks form a new version of that old block collated without the transaction.. create a hash that meets the decentralised nodes software math of validating the data to the hash. and do it all fast enough to catch up and overtake the current blockheight of all the other good miners.. to then re-org the blockchain to the narfarious users version where a transaction previously deemed as spent is seen as unspent..

but that requires alot of time and expense
..
here is the thing. in 2013 .. ASICS came in that were able to brute force create a competitive difficulty hash hundreds of times faster then a desktop PC of 2013

some altcoiners seen it as a security risk to their altcoin because 1 asic could completely 100% overtake their hashrate and control their networks flow of blocks..
altcoins decided they would instead change their algo to avoid sha256 as their "fix" to their fear of ASICs

did we bitcoiners care, no..
why.
because we just bought those very same ASICS altcoiners feared and made them part of the strength that builds a stronger hash of good morally following blocks...
no algo change. we just used the efficiency to make a more difficult prefix to find. and strengthen our network further

if someone can make a sha256 hash faster then current asics.. people will buy them asics and use them to morally hash good blocks with a more efficient and stronger hash. no algo changes. just a higher difficulty hash.

..
at the moment. there are 1.5milllion asics protecting and creating strong hashes for bitcoin blocks.
each of which are milions of times faster then a PC. so the network hashrate is trillions of times stronger then a single PC(spu mining) of 2009 hashrate era.

if someone found a method to bruteforce and create competing blocks:
50x faster.. they would still need 30,000 systems/devices running
200x faster.. they would still need 1,500 systems/devices running
1000x faster.. they would still need 300 systems/device running

.. not cheap for a single person to buy to hope to overtake the network.. especially if the reward for being nefarious wont cover the costs quick..

in this situation the people owning the 1.5m asics(morally good miners). would just buy 500,000 bruteforcers and use them to build stronger good blocks
(much as the case of the gpu->asic transition)

---

as for the wallet and the elliptic curve security of private/public keypairs..
yes secure your wallet.dat file..
but here is the thing its been sat for a decade now that the very old p2pk addresses are vulnerable. yet 12 years on no one has managed to brute force satoshi's 2009 stash which are stored on p2pk addresses.

but if p2pkh or p2wpkh was to become vulnerable. a new tx format can be slipped in and people move their funds across.
again a weakness of elliptic curve does not mean anyone can steal any funds from all keys in one go in a few seconds.
they would need to choose wisely which address to target and spend time breaking it. one by one.

a simple solution to not be a easy first target before the news gets out.. dont have huge sums of value in a single key..
then if we do need to transition to key tx formats.. with new keypair signing methodology. it becomes easier to do. by not making yourself the first target a nefarious person attacks first before a new format is introduced.

You have included a link to quantum computing in your post. AFAIK, sha256 is quantum hard. Only Grover's algorithm can give an advantage, and it still requires millions of qubits.

Anyhow, it won't happen in a day. There's no way. It will take decades and bitcoin will adapt to all the major changes.  Bitcoins will fork into a better hash function.

With quantum, you should be more worried about the elliptic curve and we already got Deterministic wallets as one of the safeguards.
You are worrying too early my man

I think there is already research on quantum computing resistant cryptographic algorythms!

Without much research of my own I find a few links talking about it
https://ianix.com/pqcrypto/pqcrypto-deployment.html
https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2016/12/nist-asks-public-help-future-proof-electronic-information
https://csrc.nist.gov/news/2016/public-key-post-quantum-cryptographic-algorithms

So, I think the community is probably aware of the possible problem it may exist in the future!

Bitcoin has a vulnerability against bruteforce, same ethereum and 99.9% actual cryptos, even a home banking system has more chances to survive to an attack like that, except banks that allows their users to frozen their account and set more methods of authentication to the home banking and servers are designed to ban ips and log ins after many failed attempts, but credit and debit cards are vulnerables to those attacks as bitcoin and ethereum and 99.9% of the crypto users.

im not a financial advisor, im just here to tell you all what comes.

is your duty do your own research about what im talking about.

1. make an encrypted iso tool to store in the hardisk the wallet.dat, protect that wallet file from being captured by an attacker to decrypt it as local, there are two options for this, build a program for windows and unix or just manage yourself with more than one device and use crypto as a bank system with a main bank and secndary wallets
2. there is a crypto that is solving all the problems that bitcoin and ethereum has, and his method of invulnerability against brute force is better than sha256 and sha512, i wont say what or which coins are, do your own research
3. bitcoin for now is safe, in 2022, for now is safe, but not in the future.
4. world is going to change, do your own research, is not anymore january 2009

“If SHA-256 became completely broken, I think we could come to some agreement about what the honest block chain was before the trouble started, lock that in and continue from there with a new hash function.”
— Satoshi Nakamoto

“If SHA-512 became completely broken, I think we could come to some agreement about what the honest block chain was before the trouble started, lock that in and continue from there with a new hash function.”
— Japanoshi

https://quantum-computing.ibm.com/