quantumcomputing

$ADA
Charles Hoskinson on NIST Guidelines, Hidden Costs, and the 2030s Schedule

Quantum computing sometimes feels like a dark cloud hanging over the blockchain world, with people worried it will ruin the way Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other networks keep things secure. It is easy to imagine a future where a tech breakthrough makes digital assets worth trillions vulnerable overnight. But, Cardano's creator, Charles Hoskinson, is offering a more realistic take. He believes the industry should plan for the quantum threat, not freak out. We can create quantum-resistant systems, but for now, functionality and agreed-upon standards are what is holding back the blockchain world’s move to these systems.

**The Real Deal: It's About Speed, Not Just Ability**

The main fear with quantum computing comes from algorithms like Shor’s. These could potentially crack the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) that protects crypto wallets and transactions. The blockchain industry knows about this danger, and solutions, called Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC), are available.

The reason we aren't using them yet comes down to a tough choice: Do we want speed or security? Hoskinson points out that current quantum-resistant methods are often slower and more expensive to run. Some say they could cut processing speed by ten times and raise costs tenfold compared to what we are now using. For fast-moving Layer-1 networks that are always trying to be faster and cheaper, losing performance for a future threat is a no-go right now. This is the real price of quantum safety: Networks have to accept less efficiency (slower processing) and maybe higher costs, a sacrifice not many want to make until the threat is real.

**The Need for Standards: Waiting on NIST**

The other big issue is that we don't have universal, final industry standards. Blockchain networks can't just switch to new, complicated cryptographic standards if they might be outdated later.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is essential here. NIST has been running a competition for years to pick and standardize a group of PQC algorithms. They have recently released initial standards like FIPS 203 (ML-KEM), FIPS 204 (ML-DSA), and FIPS 205 (SLH-DSA), so things are moving forward. Still, until we have a full set of approved standards, including the upcoming FIPS 206 (FN-DSA/FALCON), the industry can't spend billions of dollars and years of work on a protocol change that might not pass future security checks. Hoskinson is sensible about this. The industry is waiting for official approval to make sure they can easily switch cryptography when needed.

**The 2030s Target: A Race Against Time**

The threat isn't right now. Today's quantum computers don't have enough stable, quality logical qubits (we need millions) to run Shor's algorithm on our current public-key cryptography.

Talking about projects like the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) Quantum Blockchain Initiative, Hoskinson suggests a clear timeline: Big quantum problems should start popping up in the 2030s. This gives developers about ten years. Now is the time to plan, research, and add quantum-resistant features into the next round of protocol updates, not rush into changes. For example, cold wallet addresses that haven't been used in a transaction (so their public key isn't exposed) are currently safe because of a hash. But addresses that have shown their public key are at risk of a harvest now, decrypt later attack once we have a strong quantum computer.

**In Conclusion**

The quantum computing and blockchain discussion is a typical story of tech catching up and being strategic. We know how to protect systems from quantum threats, but the cost to system performance and the lack of set standards make it a bad idea to hurry the change. The industry is right to focus on improving scalability and adoption while planning for the eventual move to quantum-safe systems. The biggest worry isn't a lack of solutions, but jumping on the wrong solution too early. Blockchain, like cryptography, is a continuous process of getting better, not a panicked race.

**Take Action**

Keep an eye on the development of NIST PQC standards and how major Layer-1s are putting quantum-safe features into their plans in preparation for the 2030s transition.

**FAQs**

* **Q: What is a harvest-now, decrypt-later attack?**
* **A:** This is when someone collects encrypted or digitally signed data today (like a wallet's public key from an old transaction). They can't break the encryption now, but they save the data, hoping that a future quantum computer will be strong enough to decrypt it and steal funds years later.
* **Q: Are my funds safe right now?**
* **A:** Yes, current blockchains are cryptographically secure for now. Quantum computers strong enough to break today's public-key cryptography (like ECDSA) don't exist yet. The threat is usually expected to appear in the 2030s.
* **Q: What is NIST's role here?**
* **A:** The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is a U.S. agency running a competition to select and standardize new cryptographic algorithms (Post-Quantum Cryptography) that can withstand attacks from future quantum computers. The global tech and financial industries will adopt their final standards.

#QuantumComputing #orocryptotrends #Write2Earn

[] A close look at the Cardano founder's thoughts on the quantum threat, the cost versus system performance, and the importance of NIST standards in the blockchain industry.

Disclaimer: Not Financial Advice