According to Grayscale, the threat to Bitcoin from quantum computers is manageable. Rather, the biggest challenge is the required consensus on protocol changes.
• Grayscale currently sees no security threat to blockchains from quantum computers
• Nevertheless, post-quantum cryptography should begin to be introduced
• Community must reach agreement on controversial issues
At the end of March, a Google paper caused a stir, suggesting that quantum computers could crack the cryptography that protects Bitcoin much more easily and quickly than previously thought. Grayscale is not worried about Bitcoin in this regard. According to the digital asset manager, the quantum security risk varies significantly between the different blockchains.
Advertising
Over 650+ cryptos and 3,000 digital assets
Bitpanda is the BaFin-licensed crypto broker from Austria and the official crypto partner of FC Bayern Munich. Create your account with just a few clicks and benefit from 0% deposit and withdrawal fees.
As Cointelegraph reports, Zach Pandl, head of research at Grayscale, argues that from a purely technical perspective, Bitcoin has lower quantum risk than other networks. He points out that the original cryptocurrency uses a UTXO model and a proof-of-work consensus, has no native smart contracts and certain address types are not quantum vulnerable.
Governance issues
According to Pandl, there is currently no security threat to public blockchains from quantum computers. But even if there is currently no cause for concern for investors, he still recommends accelerating preparations for the post-quantum future. The technical tools to make blockchains quantum secure already exist.
However, Pandl sees the bigger challenge in getting the community to agree on implementing the necessary upgrades. The difficult question is what to do with old, dormant coins, particularly the approximately 1.7 million BTC locked in early P2PK addresses, including an estimated 1 million BTC believed to belong to the pseudonymous Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto.
According to the expert, there are three options for this: burn the coins, deliberately slow down their release by limiting the issuance rate of vulnerable addresses, or do nothing. “Conceptually, all options are feasible, but the challenge is making a decision, and the Bitcoin community has a history of contentious debate over protocol changes.”
Thomas Zoller, editorial team at finanzen.net
