Avalanche CEO calls for freezing Satoshi-era million Bitcoins amid quantum computing concerns

As a seasoned crypto investor with over a decade of experience in this dynamic industry, I find Emin Gün Sirer’s proposal to freeze Satoshi Nakamoto’s early mined Bitcoins intriguing and thought-provoking. While I appreciate the decentralized nature of Bitcoin, the potential threat posed by quantum computing to older cryptographic standards cannot be ignored.

According to Avalanche’s Emin Gün Sirer, the Bitcoins initially mined by Satoshi Nakamoto might be at risk due to advances in quantum computing. He recommends a possible solution of preserving these coins by freezing them.

Emin Gün Sirer, the creator of Avalanche (AVAX), ignited a discussion on X in a December 10th post, suggesting the freezing of approximately $97 billion worth of Bitcoins (BTC). These coins, rumored to have been mined during Bitcoin’s early stages, are frequently associated with its anonymous founder, Satoshi Nakamoto.

As a researcher delving into the intricacies of digital currencies, I must clarify that Sirer’s proposal isn’t linked to the potential return of Bitcoin’s creator. Instead, he has brought attention to a significant concern: the potential vulnerability of these coins due to quantum computing. This is because they still rely on an older cryptographic standard, which could be compromised by advancements in quantum technology.

Table of Contents

>Hello world

Sirer’s concept emerged following Google’s reveal of their quantum computing chip, called “Willow.” As reported by the tech company, Willow can execute a typical benchmark computation in less than five minutes that would require one of today’s fastest supercomputers 10 septillion (or 10^25) years to complete.

Although Willow doesn’t currently possess the ability to crack Bitcoin’s encryption, it represents an important milestone on the path towards practically applicable quantum computing.

According to Sirer, quantum computing could simplify specific tasks, particularly number factorization, yet other challenges, for instance reversing one-way hash functions, remain equally complex at this point. Nevertheless, it’s important to note that there are still several conditions to consider.

Moral case

It’s worth noting that while Bitcoin’s security remains robust due to its use of hashing functions and elliptic curve encryption, the same cannot be said for coins from the early days of Satoshi.

Sirer emphasizes a significant exception in this context: Initially minted Bitcoin coins, possibly even those mined by Nakamoto, employed the Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) method. Unlike modern formats, P2PK publicly discloses the public key, providing quantum attackers with additional information to exploit.

According to the CEO of Avalanche, these digital coins offer “the greatest reward in cryptography,” highlighting potential dangers associated with this outdated format should quantum computers grow stronger.

Sirer proposes that the Bitcoin community might want to think about rendering coins kept in P2PK addresses inactive or establishing an expiration date for their usage. This action, he suggests, could safeguard Bitcoin’s overall credibility by preventing potential breaches from quantum computers breaking through P2PK encryption in the future.

The suggestion, nonetheless, has garnered both approval and objections. On one hand, supporters consider it a forward-thinking measure aimed at addressing potential risks associated with new technologies. On the other hand, opponents regard it as a threat to the foundational concepts of autonomy and ownership that define Bitcoin.

What’s the matter with P2PK

As an analyst, I often observe that the majority of contemporary Bitcoin wallets employ either Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) or SegWit formats. These formats conceal a hashed version of the public key, providing an extra layer of security. In case a quantum computer is developed, it would first need to invert the hash before extracting valuable data – a task that’s incredibly challenging and difficult, much like trying to crack an extremely tough nut.

Instead, P2PK methods openly keep the public key in its original form, offering potential threats an immediate foothold for quantum attacks that employ algorithms such as Shor’s. In essence, this means these attackers could theoretically crack elliptic curve cryptography if they have sufficient computing power.

In a recent post on X, Bitcoin entrepreneur Ben Sigman clarified that while there have been advancements in quantum computing, devices such as ‘Willow’ are currently unable to execute attacks on the Bitcoin system. According to Sigman, breaking through Bitcoin’s ECDSA 256 encryption would demand over a million qubits, which is far beyond what Willow’s 105 qubits can offer, making it inadequate for such a task.

Critics push back on freezing proposal

As an analyst, I pose the thought that the freezing of Satoshi’s coins under the pseudonym “maeda_aaron” suggests might provoke Satoshi into action, breaking a prolonged silence. However, I also believe that such an action could potentially harm cryptocurrency more than the possibility of someone gaining access to these coins. The question remains as to how we can accurately identify and freeze these coins without stirring up further debate and potential controversy.

User “r8raq” inquired, “What exactly constitutes ‘Satoshi’s coin’ remains unclear,” emphasizing that “setting an expiration date and locking all coins at P2PK addresses is analogous to revoking birthright citizenship, it would stir up a great deal of controversy!

People are concerned that altering its structure may establish a pattern for further modifications, potentially causing unease among those who appreciate Bitcoin’s inherent resistance to manipulation and control. The unique attribute of Bitcoin lies in its unalterability, and tinkering with its principles might dissuade users drawn to its anti-censorship and non-interference qualities.

Although quantum computing threats remain theoretical at present, experts like Sirer advise the cryptocurrency community to anticipate potential repercussions. In his words, “Cryptocurrency attacks are not an immediate concern.” However, “for now, we should all keep tabs on how quantum computers evolve over the next few decades.

Read More

• AI16Z PREDICTION. AI16Z cryptocurrency
• POL PREDICTION. POL cryptocurrency
• Hong Kong Treasury says crypto is not a ‘target asset’ for its Exchange Fund
• Li Haslett Chen to Leave Warner Bros. Discovery Board
• Crypto ETPs hit $44.5b in YTD inflows amid Bitcoin surge
• EXCLUSIVE: Alia Bhatt in talks with Dinesh Vijan for a supernatural horror thriller; Tentatively titled Chamunda
• Blockaid new dashboard to track Web3 activity and threats
• SEN PREDICTION. SEN cryptocurrency
• PYTH PREDICTION. PYTH cryptocurrency
• The Vampire Diaries Nina Dobrev Reunited With Co-Stars To Recreate Throwback Photo, And I’m Not The Only One Loving It

2024-12-10 18:24