Putting The Quantum-Crypto Predicament In Perspective
While we all wait in anticipation for the 'onslaught' of the quantum revolution to cause panic and strife to the crypto space, a sense of pragmatism is not only in order, but essential. Taking a level-headed approach to this looming issue should be considered with a common-sense approach, not with phantom fears, and similar to the DYOR mantra when it comes to understanding digital assets, education on the issue is key. So, while we may gravitate to doomsday headlines on this topic, let consider a few rational points on the matter to put this subject in proper context. The Embryonic Stage To understand the quantum problem is to go back a few decades to the early 1990's when "modern" encryption methods could in theory be hacked. There was no proof of this of course, until around 1994 when Peter Shor produced a paper that could calculate mathematical equations exponentially faster than the standard computers at the time. While long before the advent of cryptocurrency or blockchain was on the scene, a cloud of uncertainty appeared in the 'matrix', but only known to a few who could be bothered to even care. Zing past a few years and this subject went from a nagging uncertainlty to DEFCON-4... not Level-1 readiness, but still a shock to the system. This is when encryption standards were being battle-tested, giving rise to the early authentication methods of Web1.0. Then in the late 1990s, with this as the backdrop, someone got the idea that 1 second into the dawn of the new decade, the stone-age would await us all, ushering in the fear of the Millennium or Y2K bug. This is not unlike a similar rallying cry that some are prophesizing to us about the quantum menace... only this time, the stakes are much higher with the consumer web now 30+ years in production. The Irrational Marketing Program What is different this time around in contrast to the Y2K situation is the number of influencers keen for a good story. Now, it is agreed that while there is no question that the possibility of damage with quantum is an order of magnitude larger than it was in 1999, the basic storyline is the same, which is that Proper Planning Prevents Poor Performance. But to some, that's lame, and gets in the way of painting a vivid picture of the damage which quantum will cause. An example of this is the perception that the blockchain, as a whole, will be simply moved to the trash bin in the cloud once released. The issue with that statement is that the blockchain itself cannot simply be erased as quantum infiltrations (real or AI) can decrypt value, not a platform (or ledger). In other words, is the bank robber looking for the value (money), or the building itself? Another classic yarn you may hear about is the notion that when quantum does arrive, your crypto will be instantly eradicated. The facts however tell a different story, and the fact is that quantum-powered systems will not scale immediately, but overtime, and when rolled-out, weaker encryption standards will be the immediate target long before Bitcoin's strong encryption is considered imminent. The Road To Enlightenment (or at least understanding) Looking at the prospect of damage from quantum computing is to simply level-set and apply the basics by understanding where the technology is going, and insert the relevant safeguargs in advance (like the Y2K preparations in the late '90s). As it applies to crypto, what we need to first understand is that Bitcoin is the most secure infrastructure in the world. Taking this simple fact as truth, if the purveyors of mass hysteria were on the right track, this would mean that all other systems that are less-secure (banks, health records, airline systems, military & defence, etc.) would be compromised immediately.
Has this happened? No... and the reason is as elementary as 1+1, which is that for many years engineers have been working on a solution to intercept the problem before it has a chance to cause widespread damage. Yes, there is a chance of a leakage occurring, but for those that know, they understand what is at stake, and have been working on this problem for years as the result of not doing anything could have catastrophic economic consequences. Let's also remember that the computer scientists working on this are early Bitcoin developers themselves and who also have the most at stake.
So what are the threats that are real and not perceived? Well, in plain terms is all comes down to math, where the better math wins. Case in point, the standard which keeps Bitcoin secure is the private key, of which the public key is derived. Crypto tokens such as BTC and ETH use this type of security, such that when a new address is created, both a private key and a public key are presented to the recipient, and where the private key is ket secret, while the public key is used for verification. It's important to note that your public key (which is used when sending value) is not the same as your address (which can be used on any blockchain 'explorer' to see your token balance). Think of the private key as the lock to your email account, where the public key is the mailbox (i.e. [email protected]). Anyone can send mail to your mailbox, but only you have the combination / password (private key) to open it. With Bitcoin for example which uses ECC (or 'Elliptic Curve Cryptograhy'), it is theoretically possible to reverse-engineer a public key to get the private key, but as the process is incredibly complex, it would be the equivalent of un-pickling a pickle... or reversing the process of a pickle back to it's clean Kirby-cucumber state. Even Hercules would balk as such a challenge. With the onset of quantum technology, the 'im' in impossible starts to fade, but as it is theoretically possible, one method which antagonists are considering is the process of HNDL (a play on 'HODL' but reversed) where the pepetrators Harvest Now and Decrypt Later by storing your public key in a database in an attempt to glean your private key and then siphon the contents when the technology is available. The thinking on this is "If I get a number of Private Keys in my database, I'll wait 5 or more years in which to cash in". These and other options are specifically the types of threats that white-hat engineers have been working on in an efort to 'cut 'em off at the pass', and having been at it for many years, the chances are good that elevated levels of security are not only being worked-on, but actively tested. So like many other digital threats that have come before (from strong passwords to 2FA), this is just another gate that is being worked on for the security of not only crypto, but other applications which have just as much (or more) to lose if quantum is used in nefarious ways. Quantum by itself is a neutral entity, as it's the intent behind it that can be used for good or evil, and while we may not be able to convince those in the minority who are spreading the bogeyman-like chatter for headlines, the truth is that the future of quantum computing has many positive attributes such as optimizing logistical issues, revolutionizing illnesses or discovering better sources of energy. For now, if you hold cryptocurrency and are (rightfully) concerned about the quantum problem, the issue is actively being vetted with a myriad of solutions... such as a change in the key-type to make legacy keys robust, as well as the off-line cold-storage devices to be quantum-ready. Our job is to simply keep our eye on the ball by doing our research and heeding the call when the updates are in production.
__________________________________________________________________________________________ Title image by Michael Ancher | Shor's Algorithm by Peter Shor | Bitcoin White Paper by Satoshi Nakamoto











