Эксперты призывают к быстрому переходу на квантово-устойчивые стандарты для защиты биткоина Translation: Experts urge rapid transition to quantum-resistant standards to protect Bitcoin

Analyst Willy Wu has proposed a method to safeguard the original cryptocurrency against quantum threats. He believes that assets should be transferred to SegWit addresses and kept there for approximately seven years.

He asserts that quantum computers will have the capability to derive private keys from public ones. Wu claims that the current Taproot format is vulnerable as it directly embeds the public key. In contrast, SegWit technology conceals it until the first outgoing transaction occurs.

For the protection to be effective, users must refrain from sending bitcoins from such wallets until a comprehensive solution to the issue is implemented.

Wu acknowledged that, by general consensus, the threat is not expected to become real before 2030, by which time developers may establish standards for quantum-resistant encryption.

This stance was contested by Charles Edwards, the founder of Capriole, who labeled SegWit as “not a protective model” and warned that a seven-year wait could lead to a network collapse.

According to him, the community should be actively working on protocol updates to defend against quantum computers. Edwards referred to the original cryptocurrency as “the world’s most vulnerable network.”

Quantum computers could potentially breach the encryption of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies within two years, according to projections from the Quantum Doomsday Clock project.

Researchers calculated that compromising the ECC-256 algorithm would require 1,673 qubits, while RSA-2048 would need 2,314 qubits, and RSA-4096 would necessitate 3,971 qubits.

These calculations rely on using surface error correction codes with an estimated error rate from 10^-3 to 10^-5. Advances in this area could expedite the timeline.

The authors noted that recent developments are focused on error control and reduction rather than increasing the number of qubits. If the emphasis shifts to scaling, quantum supremacy could be achieved sooner than currently anticipated. Once the requisite power is reached, an attack could take anywhere from a few hours to several days.

The analysis showed that P2PKH Bitcoin wallets would receive a brief delay. These wallets utilize new public keys for each transaction. However, in the long term, systems based on current encryption standards will need to adopt post-quantum protocols to maintain security.

Edwards acknowledged the merit of the project but argued he disagreed with the methodology of the calculations.

“The idea behind the Quantum Doomsday Clock is valuable, as it gives us a visual representation of what we need to strive for. If we don’t solve the quantum dilemma for Bitcoin by that time… we’ll find ourselves in a very precarious position,” he stated.

Panic in the crypto market spreads faster than reason. The market is governed by code, yet emotions drive the prices. An unfounded claim about Bitcoin being hacked by a quantum computer could trigger a chain reaction and crash the market. This alarm was raised by Yun Au, the founder of BOLTS Technologies, in a comment to Decrypt. He recalled a recent sudden price drop.

“There was a minor flash crash in the crypto market. A sell-off of $50-100 million—nothing for traditional markets—triggered huge losses in blockchain assets. This illustrates how fragile the system remains,” Au explained.

He stated that a similar scenario could unfold if panic surrounds quantum computing. If someone claims that elliptic curve cryptography has been breached, “everyone will rush for the exits, and the system will collapse.”

Edward Parker, a physicist at RAND Corporation, believes the quantum threat to cryptography is serious and warrants preemptive preparation.

Researcher Ian McCormack is confident that fear is outpacing the actual capabilities of the technology.

“Quantum computers are nowhere near possessing sufficient power to break RSA-2048 or any other significant cryptography. Reducing error rates and combining thousands of qubits to solve practical problems will require time, money, and countless attempts,” he remarked.

McCormack added that the “mystique” surrounding quantum computing intensifies the fear. In his view, developing quantum-resistant cryptography will almost certainly occur faster than creating a computer capable of breaching current encryption standards.

Coin Metrics co-founder Nick Carter labeled quantum computing as “the biggest risk to Bitcoin.” According to him, around 4 million BTC are already held in addresses with exposed public keys, making them theoretically vulnerable to quantum attacks.

Experts agree that action must be taken now. Rebecca Krauthammer, co-founder of QuSecure, advocated for moving away from elliptic curve cryptography in favor of post-quantum standards like ML-DSA.

Updating Bitcoin is a complex political process. The security model of the network requires consensus among miners, developers, and node operators. Any cryptographic change would necessitate a fork, the discussion of which could take years.

Professor of Computer Science Scott Aaronson noted that the decentralization of the first cryptocurrency network complicates updates.

“In Ethereum and most other networks, someone can make a decision to switch to quantum-resistant cryptography. In Bitcoin, a consensus among the majority of miners is required for a fork,” he stated.

The absence of a central authority could slow its implementation. Haste or division risks damaging the network. However, many Bitcoin developers are confident that if a workable solution is found, consensus can be achieved.

There currently is no quantum computer capable of breaching the encryption of digital gold. Current prototypes boast thousands of qubits, but millions of qubits with error correction are needed for a steady attack.

Professor Christopher Paquette from the University of Michigan believes that there is no real threat in the next few years. He stated that in the short term, the best protection is behavioral.

“Public keys should not be disclosed online until absolutely necessary, and they should have a short lifespan,” Paquette advised.

Most experts view a gradual transition as the safest approach. This will help avoid chaos that could undermine trust in the system more than any genuine quantum attack.

It is worth noting that in July, a group of developers found a method to protect the first cryptocurrency’s network from potential threats posed by quantum computers.