6 ms·
SO... BTC goes to zero?
by ransom1538 1y ago
SO... BTC goes to zero?
- deliriumchn 1y agono, not really, PQC is already being discussed in pretty much every relevant crypto thing for couple years alearady and there are multiple PQC algos ready to protect important data in banking etc as well
- cyberpunk 1y agoI don’t really understand the threat to banking. Let’s say you crack the encryption key used in my bank between a java payment processing system and a database server. You can’t just inject transactions or something. Is the threat that internal network traffic could be read? Transactions all go to clearing houses anyway. Is it to protect browser->webapp style banking? those all use ec by now anyway, and even if they don’t how do you mitm this traffic? Where is the exact threat?
- conradev 1y agoThe big threat is passively breaking TLS, so it’s browser traffic. Or, any internet traffic?
- cyberpunk 1y agoOkay, but breaking that TLS (device->bank) would allow you to intercept the session keys and then decrypt the conversation. Alright, so now you can read I logged in and booked a transaction to my landlord or whatever. What else can you do? OTP/2FA code prevents you from re-using my credentials. Has it been demonstrated at all that someone who intercepts a session key is able to somehow inject into a conversation? It seems highly unlikely to me with TCP over the internet. So we are all in a collective flap that someone can see my bank transactions? These are pretty much public knowledge to governments/central banks/clearing houses anyway -- doesn't seem like all that big a deal to me. (I work on payment processing systems for a large bank)
- bawolff 1y ago> Has it been demonstrated at all that someone who intercepts a session key is able to somehow inject into a conversation? It seems highly unlikely to me with TCP over the internet. if you can read the TLS session in general, you can capture the TLS session ticket and then use that to make a subsequent connection. This is easier as you dont have to be injecting packets live or make inconvinent packets disappear.
- cyberpunk 1y agoIt seems like detecting a re-use like this should be reasonably easy, it would not look like normal traffic and we could flag this to our surveillance systems for additional checks on these transactions. In a post quantum world, this seems like something that would be everywhere anyway (and presumably, we would be using some other algo by then too). Somehow, I'm not all that scared. Perhaps I'm naive.. :}
- bawolff 1y ago> It seems like detecting a re-use like this should be reasonably easy, it would not look like normal traffic I don't see why it wouldn't look like normal traffic. > Somehow, I'm not all that scared. Perhaps I'm naive.. :} We're talking about an attack that probably won't be practical for another 20 years , which already has counter measures that are in testing right now. Almost nobody should be worried about it.
- bawolff 1y ago> those all use ec by now anyway As far as i am aware, eliptic curve is also vulnerable to quantum attacks. The threat is generally both passive eavesdropping to decrypt later and also active MITM attacks. Both of course require the attacker to be in a position to eavesdrop. > Let’s say you crack the encryption key used in my bank between a java payment processing system and a database server. Well if you are sitting in the right place on the network then you can. > how do you mitm this traffic? Depends on the scenario. If you are government or ISP then its easy. Otherwise it might be difficult. Typical real life scenarios are when the victim is using wifi and the attacker is in the physical vicinity. Like all things crypto, it always depends on context. What information are you trying to protect and who are you trying to protect. All that said, people are already experimenting with PQC so it might mostly be moot by the time a quantum computer comes around. On the other hand people are still using md5 so legacy will bite.
- cyberpunk 1y ago> Well if you are sitting in the right place on the network then you can. Not really. This would be if not instantly then when a batch goes for clearing or reconciliation, be caught -- and an investigation would be immediately started. There are safeguards against this kind of thing that can't be really defeated by breaking some crypto. We have to protect against malicious employees etc also. One can not simply insert bank transactions like this. They are really extremely complicated flows here.
- bawolff 1y agoI meant on a technical level you could insert the data into the network. Obviously if the system as a whole does not depend on TLS for security, then no amount of breaking TLS will impact it
- chuckadams 1y agoFlooding the system with forged messages that overwhelm the clearinghouse having to verify them sounds like a good way to bring down a banking system.
- cyberpunk 1y agoSure, if a bank gets compromised you could in theory DOS a clearing house, but I'd be completely amazed if it succeeded. Those kind of anomalous spikes would be detected quickly. Not even imagining that each bank probably has dedicated instances inside each clearing house. These are fairly robust systems. You'd likely have a much better impact dossing the banks.
- chuckadams 1y agoYah, I suspect the banks pay a handsome sum to smarter people than you and me, and they've gamed this out already.
- cyberpunk 1y agoI build such systems ;)
- pclmulqdq 1y agoNo, we're still not much closer to that event.
- LarsDu88 1y agoIf quantum computers crack digital crytography, traditional bank account goes to zero too because regular 'ol databases also use crytography techniques for communication.
- wcoenen 1y agoIf all else fails, banks can generate terabytes of random one-time pad bytes, and then physically transport those on tape to other banks to set up provably secure communication channels that still go over the internet. It would be a pain to manage but it would be safe from quantum computing.
- SAI_Peregrinus 1y agoThey could also use pre-shared keys with symmetric cryptography. AES-256-GCM is secure against quantum attack, no need to bother with one-time pads.
- OsrsNeedsf2P 1y agoLet's say I give you a function you can call to crack any RSA key. How are you hacking banks?
- r33b33 1y agoThis is WRONG and a very common stupid belief. Traditional banks will just transfer easily to safer encryption, since they are centralised. Bitcoin won't. Bitcoin will die and world will undergo infinite suffering.
- bilsbie 1y agoI don’t see why bitcoin wouldn’t update its software in such a case. The majority of minors just need to agree. But why wouldn’t they if the alternative is going to zero?
- jonathanlydall 1y agoSir Alexander Dane: MINERS, not MINORS.
- FergusArgyll 1y agoThat actually confused me. I thought he he meant "the majority of the minority" while I was pretty sure it's just a simple majority
- jacquesm 1y ago"Ahhhh... now you tell me" (Formerly Prince Andrew, at some point).
- andrewstuart2 1y agoI'll tell you right now, no way my kids would agree until they're at least adults. They don't even know what asymmetric cryptography is.
- LPisGood 1y agoI’m confused, are your kids major Bitcoin miners?
- andrewstuart2 1y agoNot major miners, but minor miners (if you count Minecraft).
- jdiff 1y agoGGP used the term "minors," GP is running with the typo.
- 1y ago
- logtrees 1y agoNo, I don't think so. By the time quantum supremacy is really achieved for a "Q-Day" that could affect them or things like them, the existing blockchains which have already been getting hardened will have gotten even harder. Quantum computing could be used to further harden them, as well, rather than compromise them. Supposing that Q-Day brought any temporary hurdles to Bitcoin or Ethereum or related blockchains, well...due to their underlying nature resulting in justified Permanence, we would be able to simply reconstitute and redeploy them for their functionalities because they've already been sufficiently imbued with value and institutional interest as well. These are quantum-resistant hardenings. So I do not think these tools or economic substrate layers are going anywhere. They are very valuable for the particular kinds of applications that can be built with them and also as additional productive layers to the credit and liquidity markets nationally, internationally, and also globally/universally. So there is a lot of institutional interest, including governance interest, in using them to build better systems. Bitcoin on its own would be reduced in such justification but because of Ethereum's function as an engine which can drive utility, the two together are a formidable and quantum-resistant platform that can scale into the hundreds of trillions of dollars and in Ethereum's case...certainly beyond $1Q in time. I'm very bullish on the underlying technology, even beyond tokenomics for any particular project. The underlying technologies are powerful protocols that facilitate the development and deployment of Non Zero Sum systems at scale. With Q-Day not expected until end of 2020s or beginning of 2030s, that is a considerable amount of time (in the tech world) to lay the ground work for further hardening and discussions around this.