A technical debate erupted round X after on-chain analyst Willy Wu revealed what he referred to as a “dummy information to quantum safety,” urging Bitcoin holders emigrate their cash from faucet root addresses (bc1p) to SegWit bc1q or older P2PKH/P2SH codecs and keep away from spending till post-quantum safety is on the market.
Find out how to make Bitcoin “quantum safe”
“Up to now, it was necessary to guard the non-public key (seed phrase). Within the coming age of scary quantum computer systems (BSQC), the general public key should even be protected. Principally, BSQC can work out the non-public key from the general public key. Present taproot addresses (within the newest format) will not be safe. These are addresses that begin with ‘bc1p’ and have the general public key embedded within the handle, which is unhealthy,” Wu wrote on November eleventh. 11.
His argument hinges on the well-understood distinction between Bitcoin script sorts. Taproot (P2TR) encodes the general public key instantly into the output and handle, whereas conventional codecs resembling P2PKH/P2SH and SegWit P2WPKH hash the general public key and solely expose it when the coin is spent. This architectural distinction might be necessary sooner or later when sufficiently highly effective quantum computer systems can derive non-public keys from revealed public keys. In line with an unbiased reference, P2TR really retains the general public key within the output, whereas P2PKH hides the general public key till a while passes.
Woo’s preliminary playbook is easy. Transfer your UTXO to the bc1q (or “1”/”3″) handle and proceed receiving to that handle, however “by no means ship BTC from there” till Bitcoin ships a quantum-resistant improve. At that time the proprietor ought to transfer to a time of low congestion to reduce the window by which the general public key’s uncovered within the reminiscence pool. “Ship your BTC to a brand new quantum-secure handle when the community will not be congested. Doing so will expose your non-public key for a brief time period, however it’s unlikely that BSQC will steal your cash inside that quick time period.”
He additionally warned that P2PK’s “Satoshi-era” output is most in danger, suggesting misplaced cash with previous spending historical past may very well be susceptible. “Satoshi’s 1 million cash utilizing historic P2PK addresses might be stolen (until frozen by a future delicate fork),” he wrote, including that chilly storage in ETFs, authorities bonds, and exchanges “may very well be quantum-resistant if directors take motion” properly earlier than a delicate fork.
Whereas Woo characterised the business’s expectations for the arrival of “Q-Day” as “2030 and past,” he emphasised that quantum-resistant requirements are already being rolled out into the broader crypto area.
Former Bitcoin Core maintainer Jonas Schnelli agreed with the hygiene, however opposed the framework. He referred to as Wu’s plan a wise mitigation plan for unspent cash, saying, “P2PKH supplies years of safety, whereas Taproot exposes public keys immediately,” however rejected the time period “quantum safe.”
In Schnelli’s view, the second any spending is broadcast, “your public key hits the reminiscence pool. A quantum attacker might crack your key and RBF might double spend earlier than the transaction is confirmed (~10 minutes).” Schnelli concluded, “It is a prudent precaution, not a everlasting resolution.”
On the time of writing, BTC was buying and selling at $104,693.
Featured picture created with DALL.E, chart on TradingView.com
