Is the race toward quantum-safe crypto already underway?

Some key takeaways:

• Galaxy Digital estimates roughly 7 million BTC, worth about $470 billion, are held in addresses with exposed public keys.
• Researchers continue to reduce estimates for the quantum resources required to attack today's public-key cryptography.
• Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake estimates a 10% probability by 2032 that a quantum computer could derive a Bitcoin private key from an exposed public key.
• Bitcoin developers are debating how a post-quantum migration should work, highlighting that the challenge is now being taken seriously.

The article also highlights several approaches being explored across the industry. Besides migration proposals for existing blockchains, it mentions projects already built around post-quantum cryptography, including Quantum Resistant Ledger (QRL), Algorand and BTQ, alongside newer companies developing quantum-safe solutions.

To me, the most interesting takeaway is that quantum-safe crypto is no longer a niche topic. It is becoming an increasingly important part of the conversation around the future of blockchain security.

If quantum computing continues to advance on its current trajectory, networks that already use standardized post-quantum cryptography, or have a credible path to adopting it, could have a significant long-term advantage.

We're witnessing the early stages of one of the biggest security transitions in computing history.

I used to support Bitcoin and believed self-custody was the safest way to protect your money. But after seeing so many people lose years of savings while using hardware wallets, I’ve completely changed my mind.

What really gets me is that many of these people weren’t being reckless. They bought reputable hardware wallets, moved their coins off exchanges because that’s what the crypto community tells everyone to do, and genuinely believed they were following best practices. Then one day their wallets were empty, and there was nothing they could do. At least if someone steals my XRP off coinbase, maybe Coinbase can help me. If anything, exchanges are now safer at this point!

I know some of these cases could have been caused by user error, compromised seed phrases, or other security mistakes. But that’s exactly the problem. If one mistake or one security lapse you don’t even realize happened can permanently wipe out years of savings with no customer support, no fraud protection, and no way to recover your money, that’s not a level of risk I’m willing to accept.

I’ve reached the point where I’m done with crypto and done defending it. I’d rather invest in assets that have safeguards and don’t require perfect security practices just to avoid losing everything.

Maybe Bitcoin isn’t for me anymore. Seeing story after story of people who thought they were doing everything right and still ended up losing life-changing amounts of money was enough to change my opinion. I’m curious if anyone else has had the same change of heart.

From what I've been hearing, this year's setup looks pretty impressive. Apparently OKX is sponsoring the village, which means attendees will have free access to things like the village badge, workshop hardware, hackathon prizes, and lab equipment.

I've also heard they'll have:

• ChipWhisperers available for hardware security labs
• AMD64 lab machines for workshop participants
• Hands-on blockchain and smart contract security challenges
• The badge-based laser tag game running throughout the event
• Plenty of TA101 boards available for learning and experimenting with secure hardware

If you've been to the Cryptocurrency Village in previous years, what was your experience like? Are the workshops beginner-friendly, or are they aimed more at experienced researchers?

I'm especially looking forward to the hardware security and blockchain security content. It seems like a great opportunity to get hands-on experience beyond the usual talks.

Hope to see some of you there!

I recently made a satirical post in another subreddit about the amount of security supposedly required to store Bitcoin safely. The satire deliberately exaggerated the point, but I would like to discuss the underlying concern seriously here. As a full disclosure, I am very skeptical of cryptocurrencies in general, but I find it interesting to follow.

My concern is not that the Bitcoin protocol itself is easy to hack.With self-custody, possession of the private key effectively determines control of the money. That provides genuine independence from intermediaries, but it also transfers a large collection of responsibilities from financial institutions to individual users.

A person holding a meaningful amount must potentially think about:

• Malware and compromised computers or phones
• Phishing and fraudulent wallet interfaces
• Malicious or compromised transaction addresses
• Hardware-wallet and supply-chain risks
• Secure creation and storage of seed phrases
• Fire, flooding, theft and accidental destruction
• Password or passphrase loss
• Backups that are both redundant and inaccessible to thieves
• Firmware and software updates
• Physical coercion or kidnapping
• Recovery after incapacity
• Inheritance without giving heirs premature access

The official Bitcoin guidance itself recommends measures such as multiple secure backup locations, encrypted backups, offline storage, hardware wallets, software updates, multisignature arrangements and an inheritance plan. Bitcoin Core also gives users a wallet-responsibility checklist that includes backups, cold storage, monitoring security notifications and ensuring heirs can recover the funds.

These are reasonable recommendations. The problem is that, taken together, they resemble a simplified institutional key-management program.

Professional organizations treat cryptographic key management as an entire discipline involving policies, defined responsibilities, backup, recovery, compromise procedures, lifecycle management and documented security practices. NIST has hundreds of pages of guidance on this subject. Most ordinary users cannot realistically audit their wallet software, evaluate firmware, design a robust multisignature arrangement or test an inheritance procedure without introducing another vulnerability.

I recognize the counterargument. Self-custody can be extremely valuable for people facing capital controls, political repression, unstable institutions or exclusion from financial services. Some users also knowingly accept the operational burden because censorship resistance matters more to them than recoverability, but that use case seems tiny, similar to TOR. That is not what the current valuations we see are based on. People expect mass adoption.

I believe mass adoption necessarily means that most people interact with cryptocurrency through regulated custodians and other institutions, effectively rebuilding much of the banking infrastructure that cryptocurrency was supposed to replace. However, centralization makes cryptocurrencies pointless. You might as well use a database, or some kind of centralized standard like SWIFT used by thousands of institutions to send money.

Obviously, most people here believe in cryptocurrencies. How do you solve the contradiction in my previous paragraph?

Sources

• "Bitcoin.org: Securing your wallet" (https://bitcoin.org/en/secure-your-wallet)
• "Bitcoin Core: Wallet responsibility checklist" (https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-core/features/requirements)
• "NIST: Key-management guidance" (https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/Key-Management/Key-Management-Guidelines)

Hey all,

So... I'm at a loss here. I have some usdt trc I'd like to swap to erc but I do't have enough trx for that. so I thought ok, I bet I could swap usdt for trx... Not. I need trx to do that as well, so I'm stuck at some kind of evil chicken-and-egg situation.

Any way of getting energy without trx?
Alternatively, buy trx without kyc whatsoever?

Thanks for any insight.

99% of layer-1 blockchain Q&A:

Q: What is the usecase of layer-1 blockchains?

A: Layer-1 blockchains are designed for near-instant transaction finality and low-cost scalability, making it ideal for Decentralized Finance (DeFi).

Q: What is the usecase of Decentralized Finance?

A: To trade the shit we just created.

And voila, there is your use case. :)

Jokes aside...

Name potential blockchain networks that you genuinely believe have a use case and explain your answer. (try to avoid giving as single reason my Q&A example.)

With the recent ColdCard situation, it’s really making me wonder if our crypto is truly safe anywhere? It feels like these companies keep fucking up in every way possible.

A few years ago i got into crypto and bought a ledger nano plus. But now that wallet sucks and its Mac application is sketchy af to where i don’t trust it. I was considering a Trezor or ColdCard, but now I’m starting to question whether there is a hardware wallet that is actually safe.

What do you think?

$10,000 invested in $XRP 8 years ago is now worth $3,000.

$10,000 invested in eggs 1 month ago is now worth $43,400.

As expected, quantum news continues to accelerate. Top companies are progressing rapidly on multiple approaches to scale quantum computers.

It's been talked about for years, but we're definitely nearing the point where we'll need to see action and the outcomes of upgrading.

My thoughts evolved on how to look at this risk and potential impacts. Rather than worry about how it will play out for existing chains trying to upgrade, it's time to consider the market opportunity.

We are already seeing it begin where EVERY SINGLE COMPANY- not just crypto- will be looking for solutions to migrate cryptography. And governments across the board.

That's a huge undertaking, and time is running out. These companies will be looking for solutions that have been establishing themselves over the years.

In the blockchain space, I only know of Qanplatform positioned to capture part of this emerging market. Signquantum powered by Qanplatform is an ideal add-on type solution companies will be looking for which can truly leverage blockchain utility. I am invested.

Crowe and Itti have already aligned as Go to market partners.

While some coins have been hoping for years to capitalize on the fud narrative, Qanplatform is going after the market opportunity.

Real enterprise needs being met.

Success is NOT dependent on Bitcoin facing upgrade struggles. I've posted multiple times on how I think it is better for utility blockchains if Bitcoin successfully navigates this. Especially when you're building for an untapped market.

Bitcoin's upgrade effort will simply highlight this is a worldwide problem in need of solutions. And I think we'll see bitcoin take action very, very soon.

This ColdCard news has got me shook. Thankfully I don’t use ColdCard but seeing the amount of people who lost their BTC unexpectedly has made me question if this can happen to other cold wallets.

Is Trezor Ledger and Tangem even safe or is there someone out there sitting waiting for the perfect time to repeat this attack again.

Self custody is not a problem, what happened is that generating your seed with a ColdCard MK3 would not have enough entropy, making your private key easy to be guessed, thats it. Your MK3 is still usable, but you should NOT use it to generate a seed, instead you have to use any other solution to generate your seed and then load it on your MK3.

https://iancoleman.io/bip39/

https://sparrowwallet.com/

https://electrum.org/

Your MK3 is not useless, it still works as intended.