Post-quantum cryptography

>breaks your crypto

Attached: IBM_Zurich_Quantum_Computer.jpg (640x1206, 198.03K)

Not IOTA. Which is why it is the future. It's inevitable.

why not iota? because of the longer seed?

Actually it breaks everything. Banks, military, government systems, crypto, everything.

breaks my ass

it is in theory a threat to public key cryptography of small key size in about 100 years or so. in 100 years however the standard public key size can easily grow to 10 to 100 times the current standard. and it's exponentially more difficult to build a general purpose q-computer with every qbit added.

symmetric cryptography and cryptographic hashes will give little fucks about q machines. which means so long you don't reuse an bitcoin address you are fine for the next century.

jokes on you we have 100bn tokens

Because of Winternitz Signatures and it being quantum secure from the ground up

I wonder if future "mining" will just be attempting to bruteforce long inactive/abandoned bitcoin wallets.

im too dumb to undrstand this. i believe its true but if you or someone else is able to explain this to me i would be glad

people seriously believe this chandelier looking gizmo is a quantum computer kek

not that bitcoin couldn't easily adopt it both hashes+signatures and merkle trees being native to it's code from the start... not to mention taproot is already something similar.

why shouldnt a quantum computer be able to try a few billions seeds a second? maybe its not able to fake transactions but why couldnt it get into some random wallets

literally impossible with all the hardware in the world, even if future microchips were a trillion times as effective (they won't be)

that's not it, also q-computers have a very serious memory issue. they are dumber than your average casio watch from the 80s

IOTA is resistant against quantum computer attacks, due to its use of the Winternitz One Time Signature (WOTS) scheme, which is quantum resistant.[44] Due to IOTA’s choice of one-time signature scheme, spending from an address multiple times drastically reduces the security of the funds at that address, because it exposes portions of the private key associated with the address.[44]
idk I'm a brainlet too user.
But mastercard just filed a patent for the tangle so there's that

not exactly true satoshi's coins also other early mined not moved coins use p2pk not p2pkh which means the pubkey is exposed. in a few decade we might see them being spent one after the other.

your spending address changes every time, but the seed stays the same. in my opinion those computers could just try some random seeds and get into some random wallets easily

nice movie prop

if quantum computers are functional, security of the tangle woulnt be our biggest problem. even if its quantum resitant, anything else will be unsecure

q computer wouldn't churn a seed any faster than a regular one or slower even.

completely false. conventional wallet private keys are only 256 bits. you stand a reasonable chance at factoring a private with the resources of a modest data center. nobody bothers because governments just subpoena your shit and criminals just kidnap your mom.

>completely false. conventional wallet private keys are only 256 bits. you stand a reasonable chance at factoring a private with the resources of a modest data center.
bollocks you don't factor ec keys anyhow you could factor rsa keys but those are more likely to be 4096 bits.
meanwhile the largest q-computer is like 50 qbit today and that could factor maybe 12bit numbers.

even if they would be able to, this problem couldnt this problem be easily resolved by limiting the "login" attempts to maybe 1 per second

how does that apply to a know pubkey i can't comprehend. login limiting is usually done in regards to either weak but memorably passwords or for dos protection.

it looks like that because the whole thing is dipped in a vat of liquid nitrogen when it operates, no one outside a lab is going to be running one of these anytime soon.

right, just rewrite sha256 to only allow 1 "login" per second
are you serious user?

Attached: 1492228437512.png (374x363, 150.9K)

>breaks your face

Attached: B83F4986-87C8-4B21-8195-C0D8157C5F14.jpg (679x501, 61.54K)

and that monster thing couldn't break rsa-129 (which my pc could)

i thought of like if quantum computers are able to trial and error like 1 billion random private keys a second you could limit it to a specific number of trials per second per ip address.
those numbers are just guesses idk what they realy are capable of

"breaking" sha256 is a weird notion i can't wrap my head around still. bitcoin miners would be the most able to find a collision in the entire timeline if they weren't too specialized for it.

no a q-computer of sufficient size can easily know when it found the right private key without trying any others first. but traditional notions of computing don't really translate to quantum. no programs/software as we know them run on a q-computer. and all solutions good or bad exist at the same time.

if i understand this quantum science right, will this be like the discovery of fire?

think like fifty thousand orders of magnitude higher than that. e. g a few years back Google used a q computer to solve a problem that would have taken a conventional supercomputer ten thousand years. they did it in two seconds iirc.

it will be like the discovery of vulcanos.
cool but more dangerous and useless at the same time than anything.