Jameson Lopp, Christian Papathananosiou and other developers are proposing a soft fork for Bitcoin using a BIP entitled “Post Quantum Transition and Legacy Signature Sunset.”
This protocol raises the introduction of a resistant direction to quantum computing to protect funds from possible attacks on quantum computers that can break the signature of the ECDSA. The proposal, published on Github, aims to make the old one obsolete by manually enforcing Bitcoin into a new management format.
BIP addresses elliptic curve (ECDSA) sign vulnerabilities before quantum algorithms such as Shor’s. You can derive private keys from public keys exposed to the network.
To counter it, the author proposes a mandatory transition to addresses based on post-Atlantic algorithms, along with a period of bounty to implement it. The proposal “translates quantum security into personal incentives. If it’s not updated, it ensures you lose access to funds and creates places that previously did not exist,” the author commented in the repository.
Softfork is ambitious to support these post-quantum companies by introducing new options to Bitcoin Script User transfers Bitcoin from legacy address (P2PKH or P2SH) to a new onemanual process requiring renewal of wallet and services.
The proposal includes a mechanism for it.”sunset(extinction) and recovery (by zero-knowledge tests, this is optional, but for immigrated funds), It cannot be used with previous accounts after the periodand does not stop the generation of controversy in the community.
By “killing” the old orientation based on P2PKH or P2SH, the Bitcoin protocol becomes an attached surface for the most limited quantum computing, the author commented.
The stages of gentle branching of bitcoin
According to the proposal, this soft fork occurs in three phases.
Phase A: “We prohibit sending funds to addresses with quantum vulnerabilities that accelerate the adoption of P2QRH address types.”
Phase B: «Eliminates ECDSA/Schnorr’s costs and prevents the use of funds in UTXO with quantum vulnerabilities. This is activated by a highly publicized warning date about five years after activation».
Phase C (optional): «As awaiting more research and demand, an independent BIP proposes a way to enable quantum recovery of inherited UTXO, possibly by ZK-owned testing of the corresponding BIP-39 seed phrase. »
The post-proposed motivation is justified by the following facts: Around 25% of all Bitcoins revealed public chain keys. They do not reveal where the data was extracted, but the authors comment in the same way that vulnerable UTXOS could be stolen with sufficient quantum output.
What motivates quantum attackers to Bitcoin?
Jameson Ropp and company They also deepened the potential motives of the attackers. You have access to sufficient logical qubits that can violate the Bitcoin elliptic curve algorithm.
Even if Bitcoin is not the primary primary purpose of quantum computers associated with encryption, the generalized knowledge that this computer exists and can decrypt Bitcoin encryption undermines trust in the network. Attacks on Bitcoin may not have economic motivation. Attackers can have political or malicious motives and try to destroy Bitcoin’s value and trust instead of extracting value. There is no way to know in advance how, when, or why an attack occurs. You should adopt a defensive posture well before an attack.
The proponent describing quantum transition and legacy signature sunset.
As reported by Cryptonotics, quantum computing is not a “biomarker” that safely indicates the death of the Bitcoin network. Contrary to what you think, it may be This technique will help you.
For Jameson Lopp and other authors, this soft fork represents an important technical effort. It implies important technical efforts, as it includes changes to the protocol to generate and verify post-collective signatures, and thorough testing to ensure network stability. They also highlight the need for community coordination to achieve Bitcoin’s historically complex process, the consensus.
The quantum threat remains theoretical, but advances in quantum processors justify preparation. The proposal does not set a schedule, but it emphasizes the importance of taking action in advance.
The Bitcoin community should discuss BIP and assess the feasibility and balance between security and complexity. Lopp, Papathananiou, Smith, Ross, Vaile and Dallaire-Demers open an interesting technical discussion about the future of Bitcoin’s security.
