A report that Chinese researchers have employed a D-Wave quantum computer to breach encryption algorithms used to secure bank accounts, top-secret military data and crypto wallets is, at first glance, a matter of deep concern.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is the first time that a real quantum computer has posed a real and substantial threat to multiple full-scale SPN [substitution-permutation network] structured algorithms in use today,\u201d wrote<\/a> Shanghai University scientists in a peer-reviewed paper, according<\/a> to an Oct. 11 report in the South China Morning Post (SCMP).<\/p>\n The paper talks about breaking RSA (Rivest-Shamir-Adleman) encryption, one of the oldest and most widely used public-key cryptosystems.<\/p>\n Details about the latest research have been slow to emerge, so it\u2019s difficult to say for sure how dire the threat is to cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology. The paper had yet to be released in English as of Oct. 11, and researchers weren\u2019t taking any interviews, supposedly \u201cdue to the sensitivity of the topic,\u201d according to SCMP.<\/p>\n But if the researchers\u2019 results hold up and can be duplicated by others, \u201cit is a step forward\u201d in the evolution of quantum computing, Marek Narozniak, a physicist with a background in quantum computing and the founder of Sqrtxx.com, told Cointelegraph.<\/p>\n Would it mean that the password-protection mechanisms used in many industries, including banking and cryptocurrencies, might soon be vulnerable, as many fear?<\/p>\n \u201cFrom the paper, many details are missing, so it is difficult to provide a definite answer\u201d with regard to its possible significance, Massimiliano Sala, a full professor and the head of the Laboratory of Cryptography at the University of Trento, told Cointelegraph.<\/p>\n Much depends on whether the scientists were able to break RSA keys of a certain size \u2014 i.e., keys as large as those used by banks to secure customers\u2019 savings and checking accounts today. \u201cThere is no evidence of that,\u201d said Sala.<\/p>\n But if they had, it would be \u201chuge,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Quantum computing (QC), which uses atomic \u201cspin\u201d instead of an electrical charge to represent its binary 1s and 0s, is evolving at an exponential rate, many say. But full purpose QC devices have yet to emerge at scale.<\/p>\n The D-Wave machines used in Shanghai, sometimes called quantum annealers, are really proto-quantum computers, or forerunners, capable of conducting specialized tasks only.\u00a0<\/p>\n D-Wave 2X 1000 Qubit quantum annealing processor chip mounted and wire-bonded in its sample holder. Source: Mwjohnson0<\/em><\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n However, if and when universal quantum computers do emerge, some worry they could threaten the elliptic curve cryptographic structure that has served Bitcoin (BTC<\/a>) and other cryptocurrencies very well until now.<\/p>\n It could only be a matter of time before quantum computers are able to identify the enormous prime numbers that are key constituents of a Bitcoin private key \u2014 assuming no countermeasures are developed.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cWe must keep in mind that D-Wave quantum computers are not general-purpose quantum computers,\u201d added Sala. Moreover, D-Wave\u2019s \u201cability to factor RSA keys was already established by one of my colleagues a few months ago,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Takaya Miyano, a professor of mechanical engineering at Japan\u2019s Ritsumeikan University, also questioned the significance of the scientists\u2019 results \u2014 and along similar lines as Sala.\u00a0<\/p>\n The length of the integer that the Shanghai researchers factorized, 22 bits, \u201cis much shorter than that of actual RSA integers, which is usually equal to or greater than 1,024 bits \u2014 e.g., 1,024, 2,048, and maximally, 4,096 bits,\u201d he told Cointelegraph.<\/p>\n Moreover, \u201cthe D-wave machine is a kind of quantum simulator for solving optimization problems, not a universal computer,\u201d Miyano added. It isn\u2019t clear that it would be able to conduct rapid factorization of large RSA integers in the real world.<\/p>\n Factorization is a mathematical process where a number can be written as the product of smaller whole numbers. For instance, 12 can be factorized, or written, as 3 x 2 x 2. Efficient prime number factorization has been called \u201cthe holy grail\u201d of breaking an RSA public-key cryptosystem.<\/p>\n Recent: <\/strong><\/em>$556M in spot Bitcoin ETF inflows signals major shift in investor sentiment<\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n RSA is more than encryption, after all. It is also a \u201ckey\u201d generation scheme that typically involves multiplying large prime numbers. Two parties \u2014 a bank and its customer, for example \u2014 typically receive a set of prime numbers that are used to compute their private and public keys, Narozniak explained.<\/p>\n The process of actually generating private and public keys is complex, but if \u201cp\u201d and \u201cq\u201d are prime numbers, and \u201cn\u201d is the product of those two prime numbers (i.e., n = p x q), then one can say that p and q are related to the private keys and n is related to the public key.\u00a0<\/p>\n The basic mathematical principle behind RSA encryption is that while it is easy to multiply two prime numbers, it is very difficult to do the reverse \u2014 i.e., find the two prime numbers that are factors of a product \u2014 and this becomes harder as the numbers get larger.\u00a0<\/p>\n Sala\u2019s University of Trento colleagues earlier this year used a quantum annealer to uncover the two prime factors of the number 8,219,999 (32,749 and 251), \u201cwhich, to the best of our knowledge, is the largest number which was ever factorized by means of a quantum device,\u201d wrote<\/a> the researchers.<\/p>\n In Sala\u2019s view, the recent Shanghai University paper is significant \u201conly if they have found a way to factorize huge numbers.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The University of Trento researchers also cited the great potential of quantum computing to solve complex problems that have long remained \u201cintractable\u201d for classical computers.<\/p>\n Prime factorization \u2014 the problem of breaking down a number into its prime factors \u2014 in particular, \u201cis a good candidate to be effectively solved by quantum computing, in particular by quantum annealing.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Let\u2019s assume, however, that the Shanghai scientists really did find a way to use a quantum annealer to successfully breach cryptographic algorithms, including those like SPN, which are foundational for the advanced encryption standard (AES) widely used in the military and finance. What would that do to the crypto industry?<\/p>\n \u201cSymmetric ciphers such as AES-128 used for data encryption are not vulnerable to this kind of attack, as they do not rely on number factorization,\u201d said Narozniak.<\/p>\n There might be exceptions, of course, like if the cipher is a shared secret derived via RSA-based key exchange protocol, he continued. But \u201cproperly encrypted passwords and other data in general will remain encrypted even if the approach presented in that research scales up and becomes widely available \u2014 and if true,\u201d he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n Narozniak cautioned against rushing to conclusions. \u201cBefore we reevaluate our level of optimism, let us wait for someone to repeat and confirm this result,\u201d he said. \u201cClaims of breaking RSA are not so uncommon.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n In early 2023, for instance, Chinese researchers said they had factorized<\/a> a 48-bit key on a 10-qubit quantum computer, a claim \u201cwhich still has not been peer-reviewed,\u201d commented Narozniak. \u201cAnd two years before that, Claus Schnorr, who is an authority in the community, made an honest mistake and claimed RSA to be broken. I personally take such big claims with a grain of salt.\u201d<\/p>\n According to Sala: \u201cBreaking RSA would mean that a lot of software should be updated, but not drastically changed,\u201d because there are already-implemented standards that provide alternatives, including elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), used to secure Bitcoin. He added:\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cMore drastic would be the impact on credit cards and the like, which would have to be withdrawn massively, to radically change their software.\u201d\u00a0<\/p><\/blockquote>\n One might wonder why cryptocurrencies don\u2019t use RSA widely, as banks do. The crypto industry favors elliptic-curve cryptography because it makes it possible to achieve the same level of security with much smaller keys using fewer bytes, said Narozniak. This opens up digital space, which enables chains to grow faster.\u00a0<\/p>\n Elsewhere, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin suggested in March that a \u201chard fork\u201d could subvert a quantum attack on Ethereum were it to arise. \u201cWe are already well-positioned to make a pretty simple recovery fork to deal with such a situation,\u201d he posted<\/a> on Oct. 17. Users might have to download new wallet software, but few would lose funds.<\/p>\n Is it really so easy, though? \u201cI disagree that such a hard fork would be \u2018simple,\u2019\u201d said Narozniak. And looking ahead, quantum-safe signatures, such as ML-DSA, would need to have significantly larger keys and signatures compared with those used today. This could slow onchain performance and raise gas fees, he suggested.<\/p>\n Executing a hard fork would \u201cbe complex, require broad community consensus, and may not restore all lost assets or fully repair trust in the network,\u201d Samuel Mugel, chief technology officer at Multiverse Computing, told Cointelegraph. \u201cTherefore, it\u2019s crucial to implement quantum-resistant cryptography before such an attack happens to avoid this situation.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWe most certainly need to revisit our current cybersecurity defenses,\u201d Christos Makridis, associate research professor at Arizona State University and founder and CEO of Dainamic, told Cointelegraph.\u00a0<\/p>\nBitcoins Why prime factorization is important<\/h2>\n
Bitcoins Crypto keys are safe \u2014 for now<\/h2>\n
Bitcoins A history of unproven RSA claims<\/h2>\n
Bitcoins Is Buterin\u2019s \u201chard fork\u201d solution viable?<\/h2>\n
Bitcoins Safeguards are needed<\/h2>\n