Quantum computers would be so awesome (according to David Deutsch, a 300 qbit QC could simulate a whole universe), that the failure of bitcoin would be a tiny price to pay.
In a way, you can even see bitcoin as yet an other incentive for scientists and engineers to build a quantum computer.
Topic: Why is Bitcoin safe against a quantum computer? - page 3. (Read 7822 times)
As we all know elliptic curve cryptography is vulnerable to a quantum computer. For a conventional computer difficulty of breaking 256-bit key equals 256/2=128 bits. For a quantum computer it's just sqrt(256)=16 bits.
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
very wrong as the power of mathematics used increases the level of the craking cpu rises exponetially meaning that soon the step required from the cpu will be unfathomable
i call this type of cpu that requires the next cpu to be almost infinite in computing power, a number powered cpu
Obviously u are talking about some other Bitcoin implementation. What about the current one?
unless you have studied mathematics for years on end id expect this concept to be a little difficult to graph
write yourself an oct counter then examine this true oct counter
#include
#define P printf
#define F for
int main(void){
int dec,oct=0,x;
F(dec=1;dec<=1000000;dec++){
oct++;
F(x=10; (oct/(x/10))>0; x*=10){
if((oct%x)==(8*(x/10))){
oct+=(2*(x/10)); } }
P("%5d%5d\n",dec,oct);
}
return 0;
}
As we all know elliptic curve cryptography is vulnerable to a quantum computer. For a conventional computer difficulty of breaking 256-bit key equals 256/2=128 bits. For a quantum computer it's just sqrt(256)=16 bits.
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
very wrong as the power of mathematics used increases the level of the craking cpu rises exponetially meaning that soon the step required from the cpu will be unfathomable
i call this type of cpu that requires the next cpu to be almost infinite in computing power, a number powered cpu
Obviously u are talking about some other Bitcoin implementation. What about the current one?
As we all know elliptic curve cryptography is vulnerable to a quantum computer. For a conventional computer difficulty of breaking 256-bit key equals 256/2=128 bits. For a quantum computer it's just sqrt(256)=16 bits.
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
very wrong as the power of mathematics used increases the level of the cracking cpu rises exponetially meaning that soon the step required from the cpu will be unfathomable
i call this type of cpu that requires the next cpu to be almost infinite in computing power, a number powered cpu
Neither is every public private keypair in the world, by your logic. So don't do online banking. Or shop online. Or do credit card transactions.
Bitcoin is not the only thing not safe from the concept.
Bitcoin is not the only thing not safe from the concept.
Why does CIA need to destroy the banking system?
Why doesn't the CIA need to?
What do you suggest changing it to which won't be breakable with quantum computing (assuming anyone cared to throw quantum computing resources at breaking it in the first place)?
This is a hard choice for me. Signature sizes of quantum-proof schemes are too long for 250k block limit. I expect the community has much smarter people who can solve the issue.
That's interesting:
[1] Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve cryptography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin)
[2] Gavin is the lead Bitcoin developer (https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board)
[3] Gavin visits CIA (https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0)
[4] CIA involved into quantum computing (http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/)
[5] Elliptic Curve cryptography is breakable with quantum computing (http://pqcrypto.org/)
Shouldn't we change Bitcoin signing algorithm? If Gavin is against these changes it will be very suspicious...
[1] Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve cryptography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin)
[2] Gavin is the lead Bitcoin developer (https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board)
[3] Gavin visits CIA (https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0)
[4] CIA involved into quantum computing (http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/)
[5] Elliptic Curve cryptography is breakable with quantum computing (http://pqcrypto.org/)
Shouldn't we change Bitcoin signing algorithm? If Gavin is against these changes it will be very suspicious...
ALL VALID POINTS
we need a suggestion here as to quantum resistant
if there is one think we have learnt about the slightly advanced monkeys on orb 3 they keep at it until they can do it, and will f*ck anything just because they can or want to have control over the other monkeys...if they had a blow up the universe button they could not help themselves
That's interesting:
[1] Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve cryptography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin)
[2] Gavin is the lead Bitcoin developer (https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board)
[3] Gavin visits CIA (https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0)
[4] CIA involved into quantum computing (http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/)
[5] Elliptic Curve cryptography is breakable with quantum computing (http://pqcrypto.org/)
Shouldn't we change Bitcoin signing algorithm? If Gavin is against these changes it will be very suspicious...
[1] Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve cryptography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin)
[2] Gavin is the lead Bitcoin developer (https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board)
[3] Gavin visits CIA (https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0)
[4] CIA involved into quantum computing (http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/)
[5] Elliptic Curve cryptography is breakable with quantum computing (http://pqcrypto.org/)
Shouldn't we change Bitcoin signing algorithm? If Gavin is against these changes it will be very suspicious...
What do you suggest changing it to which won't be breakable with quantum computing (assuming anyone cared to throw quantum computing resources at breaking it in the first place)?
Neither is every public private keypair in the world, by your logic. So don't do online banking. Or shop online. Or do credit card transactions.
Bitcoin is not the only thing not safe from the concept.
Bitcoin is not the only thing not safe from the concept.
Why does CIA need to destroy the banking system?
That's interesting:
[1] Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve cryptography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin)
[2] Gavin is the lead Bitcoin developer (https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board)
[3] Gavin visits CIA (https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0)
[4] CIA involved into quantum computing (http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/)
[5] Elliptic Curve cryptography is breakable with quantum computing (http://pqcrypto.org/)
Shouldn't we change Bitcoin signing algorithm? If Gavin is against these changes it will be very suspicious...
[1] Bitcoin uses Elliptic Curve cryptography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin)
[2] Gavin is the lead Bitcoin developer (https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board)
[3] Gavin visits CIA (https://bitcointalk.org/?topic=6652.0)
[4] CIA involved into quantum computing (http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/)
[5] Elliptic Curve cryptography is breakable with quantum computing (http://pqcrypto.org/)
Shouldn't we change Bitcoin signing algorithm? If Gavin is against these changes it will be very suspicious...
As we all know elliptic curve cryptography is vulnerable to a quantum computer. For a conventional computer difficulty of breaking 256-bit key equals 256/2=128 bits. For a quantum computer it's just sqrt(256)=16 bits.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
Neither is every public private keypair in the world, by your logic. So don't do online banking. Or shop online. Or do credit card transactions.
Bitcoin is not the only thing not safe from the concept.
Quantum computers are just a theoreticall concept
Tell me more about that please !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Wave_Systems
Edit : CIA involved
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429429/the-cia-and-jeff-bezos-bet-on-quantum-computing/
Quantum computers are just a theoreticall concept
Sad if it's the only frontier...
Quantum computers are just a theoreticall concept
As we all know elliptic curve cryptography is vulnerable to a quantum computer. For a conventional computer difficulty of breaking 256-bit key equals 256/2=128 bits. For a quantum computer it's just sqrt(256)=16 bits.
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
Bitcoin address is a hashed public key of 256-bit EC. Hashes are resistant to quantum algos, so while someone keeps his public key unknown it's OK. But when he wants to transfer his money he must reveal the key.
Let's assume that an attacker with a quantum computer monitors all transactions. The attacker can pick any key while a transaction awaits to be included into a block. Now imagine that miners choose transactions with higher fees. The attacker can issue other transaction (when he picks the private key) that transfer coins to his address and set a higher fee. Or he could switch his mining rig on and try to find a block himself. With 0.1% of all hashpower he needs only 5 days to solve a block with 50% chance.
Seems Bitcoin is NOT safe. Or am I wrong?
Jump to: