3 ms·
>Your paper wallet might become a rather thick paper listing, though. Why? Are you saying you'll need a bunch of new addresses? I think you'll only need 1 new
by Thorrez 5y ago
>Your paper wallet might become a rather thick paper listing, though.
Why? Are you saying you'll need a bunch of new addresses? I think you'll only need 1 new address. Are you saying the addresses or stored private keys will be gigantic? I don't think that needs to be the case. Current addresses are just hashes, they can stay hashes and thus be small. Private keys don't need to be stored, only a seed needed to generate a private key needs to be stored.
- retrac 5y agoKeys for some quantum-secure crypto systems are pretty big - the Wikipedia article has a chart of proposed ones: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography#Comparison https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography#Comp... They range from about 10 to 100x as large as the EDCSA keys used in Bitcoin. This poses its own problems with transaction sizes and the block size cap and total throughput, though it's not a fatal flaw to the protocol.
- nemo1618 5y agoTrue, but you don't actually print out your private key on a paper wallet -- you print out a seed phrase, from which the key material is derived. So you might even be able to keep using the same seed phrase! (Don't quote me on that, though.)
- 3np 5y agoA 12 words BIP39 phrase is 128 bits of entropy. Is this enough? Depends on the algorithm. In either case, you'd absolutely not want to reuse the phrase. AFAIK BIP-32 does not have security guarantees such that you can't find the seed from a set of private keys.
- Thorrez 5y agoOh, very interesting. I hadn't considered that a quantum-resistant private key might have its security depend on a large amount of input randomness.