@brianphobos I'm curious how the newer privacy currencies are dealing with the real threat of QC. I seem to recall hearing a couple of newer tokes are being programmed to become QC resistant, but I can't remember which ones I had read about that were taking those precautions.
It's a more real ad present threat when you consider projects such as the Large Bitcoin Collider have already come online, have generated 3,000 trillion private keys and brute forced into at least three wallets with Bitcoin. This is not even a QC project, rather pooled computing resources in the largest brute force attack known. Imagine if at some point the cost/benefit of pooling resources becomes worthwhile to sponsor a similar style of brute force attack through Golem against Ethereum. I am not a programmer, but on the surface it would seem plausible in light of the Large Bitcoin Collider project.
The one that seems to be pitching it is IOTA which uses Lamport signatures which seem to have been around for a long time. I'm not a cryptography expert and honestly I was surprised in what @smooth said because I always thought Monero was more secure because the keys are larger than with Bitcoin but I guess I was wrong from that aspect.
Wow, I didn't even know about the Large Bitcoin Collider. That is nuts. Yeah it does seem like it could become worthwhile to sit there with it and try to brute force into the top wallets on the Bitcoin Rich List who aren't using multi-sig.
It is concerning stuff and there have been different points where Android wallet addresses and Blockchain.info addresses were hacked because they weren't "random"
I think there will continue to be exploits all the time like that. That is why I think it is crazy when I see these huge Bitcoin Whale account address values. I feel like it is smart to have the money in several different types of wallets and also have value in several different kinds of crypto that doesn't share the same code base and uses different cryptographic principles.
trillion keys, that's mad impressive entropy.@brianphobos as I understand it (I am not a cryptogrpahy expert nor a programmer), the issue of cryptographic security revolves around the concept of entropy - how likely a successful collision would happen between randomly generated private keys and public keys would result in a successful matching pair. When you consider the Large Bitcoin Collider has only managed to brute force 3 wallets out of 3,000
IOTA, as I understand it, is a bit of a hot mess. They opted to home grow their own cryptographic hash (named Curl) for their tangle protocol, and cryptography experts are discovering insufficient entropy in the algorithm. Of course, the IOTA team claims it's BS and nothing but a hit job, but I am waiting a bit to see how this shakes out before speculating.
That is interesting. Sounds like you have done a lot more research on the topic. I personally don't know much about IOTA.
@brianphobos IOTA is a radical rethinking of blockchain tech with the concept of a tangle instead of a blockchain. In a sense it's like the first non-relational database of blockchain tech (compare something like Postgre SQL relational databases to NoSQL non-relational databases). It's fast, efficient and transaction fee free (unlike Bitcoin, Ethereum with gas fees, NEO, etc.). The target market is the Internet of Things marketplace.
I have opted to withhold speculating in it until I feel IOTA has adequately addressed the cryptographic hash issue, but I absolutely think it has every potential to become blockchain v 3.0
It certainly sounds interesting. I just wonder how many of these projects will actually produce anything of value. It will probably be less than 5% of them. With something like that I might throw a couple hundred dollars at it and keep following the project and if things are looking good maybe take a bigger position.
There are so many projects to research and invest in it is crazy.
EOS is my main project that I'm buying all the time. A lot will ultimately be ridding on it for me.