Tether CEO: Satoshi's Bitcoin Wallets Might Get Hacked

[yhiaali3]

How about Taproot @ABCbits? Is it more secure? Kindly correct any of our mistakes here.

Compared with P2PK address which speculated used by Satoshi to mine 1 million Bitcoin, other kind of address (legacy, segwit and taproot) is only more secure when it's public key isn't exposed. Public key is exposed when you spend Bitcoin from that address or sign a message.

But note my statement only applies to address where it's condition to spend is sign from a private key.

Thank you for clarifying
But as far as I know any transaction needs to have the private key signed to be spent, so does this mean that all wallets of all types are at the same risk when spent from? And does this also mean that the wallet is safe as long as it is not spent from?

[bitmover]

This has been debated for years, where i usually saw one of these option
1. Do nothing.
2. Freeze all "vulnerable" address.
3. Redistribute Bitcoin on "vulnerable" address, before someone use Quantum computer to steal it.

Personally i choose option 1 since option 2 can be seen as censorship while option 3 also add question how to redistribution.

I agree with you, do nothing is the best. Because someone may mistakenly freeze coins which belongs to someone else, not satoshi. This would be literally censorship.

But I dont think this will happen anytime soon.... This is basically FUD imo.

Those more secure addresses are not here yet, not even quantum computers. And some other solution may show up before that

[ABCbits]

--snip--
But as far as I know any transaction needs to have the private key signed to be spent, so does this mean that all wallets of all types are at the same risk when spent from? And does this also mean that the wallet is safe as long as it is not spent from?

Short answer, yes to both question.

--snip--
And does this also mean that the wallet is safe as long as it is not spent from?

Short answer, yes.

--snip--
Those more secure addresses are not here yet, not even quantum computers. And some other solution may show up before that

Yeah, although NIST currently write draft in order move to post-quantum/quantum-resistant signature cryptography[1].

[1] https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2024/NIST.IR.8547.ipd.pdf

[bitmover]

--snip--
And does this also mean that the wallet is safe as long as it is not spent from?

Short answer, yes.

So satoshis addresses should be safe.

People could argue that someone could brute force it even then with quantum computers.  But I don't think that will ever be possible.

[mu_enrico]

But as far as I know any transaction needs to have the private key signed to be spent, so does this mean that all wallets of all types are at the same risk when spent from? And does this also mean that the wallet is safe as long as it is not spent from?

The issue stated in OP is about an attacker (hypothetically using quantum computing) gaining access to an address using known public key (PubKey) information, since any new addresses except P2PK "hide" its PubKey behind hash, the attacker won't be able to know its PubKey as long as it's unspent or hasn't signed message publicly as @ABCbits said. Without known PubKey, no risk of such a hypothetical attack.

The issue isn't about cracking hashes, brute-forcing private keys, etc., only about "cracking" known PubKey. And since all addresses use the same secp256k1, AFAIK pretty much they are the same*.

*Except for Taproot, couldn't comment about it, since I'm not familiar with it.

[ABCbits]

--snip--
Short answer, yes.

So satoshis addresses should be safe.

The discussion is getting longer and i may lose some context. But on my previous post, i mentioned address presumed to be owned by Satoshi use P2PK. It means the public key is exposed before it's spent. The reason i said "Short answer, yes." is almost nobody use P2PK and it's hard to find wallet software which support P2PK.

[target]

--snip--
Short answer, yes.

So satoshis addresses should be safe.

The discussion is getting longer and i may lose some context. But on my previous post, i mentioned address presumed to be owned by Satoshi use P2PK. It means the public key is exposed before it's spent. The reason i said "Short answer, yes." is almost nobody use P2PK and it's hard to find wallet software which support P2PK.

How true is this quantum computer able to hack Bitcoin?

Looks like the treat will make people sell their BTC before this quantum computer will be able to hack everyone's addresses. Sending its price as low as possible and will not be able to attract investors until they are sure its safe. If it can hack Bitcoin then all other altcoins are not safe too. 

[Crwth]

Well, we can never face whether it could happen or not. There's still a possibility, even if it's tiny. The world's progress is fast now, especially with the help of AI in our midst. It's something that we could improve on and maybe find a solution for when that happens. His wallet has a lot of BTC so that it might have a negative impact in the short term.

[bitmover]

The discussion is getting longer and i may lose some context. But on my previous post, i mentioned address presumed to be owned by Satoshi use P2PK. It means the public key is exposed before it's spent. The reason i said "Short answer, yes." is almost nobody use P2PK and it's hard to find wallet software which support P2PK.

How true is this quantum computer able to hack Bitcoin?

Looks like the treat will make people sell their BTC before this quantum computer will be able to hack everyone's addresses. Sending its price as low as possible and will not be able to attract investors until they are sure its safe. If it can hack Bitcoin then all other altcoins are not safe too.

Don't worry

If someone is able to hack a bitcoin address, he will basically be able to hack the entire internet, all bank accounts in world, swift, etc etc.

Bitcoin wouldn't be a great problem in such situation.

[ABCbits]

--snip--

How true is this quantum computer able to hack Bitcoin?

It depends on what you mean by hack. But AFAIK quantum computer with sufficient qubits can crack private key of an address when it's public key it's known. I have no idea when will such quantum computer can be created though.

Looks like the treat will make people sell their BTC before this quantum computer will be able to hack everyone's addresses. Sending its price as low as possible and will not be able to attract investors until they are sure its safe. If it can hack Bitcoin then all other altcoins are not safe too.

I expect there will be quantum resistant address on Bitcoin, so people have time to move their Bitcoin some time before it could happen.

[joniboini]

It depends on what you mean by hack. But AFAIK quantum computer with sufficient qubits can crack private key of an address when it's public key it's known. I have no idea when will such quantum computer can be created though.

Last time I checked there is a 1k qubits quantum computer already, how many qubits are considered enough to brute force a private key? I remember some people freaked out a few months ago claiming that Bitcoin will get broken soon (like, in the next few months or so) because Willow was developed. Not to mention the media keep paraphrasing and adding things to make an article spicy.

[ABCbits]

It depends on what you mean by hack. But AFAIK quantum computer with sufficient qubits can crack private key of an address when it's public key it's known. I have no idea when will such quantum computer can be created though.

Last time I checked there is a 1k qubits quantum computer already, how many qubits are considered enough to brute force a private key? I remember some people freaked out a few months ago claiming that Bitcoin will get broken soon (like, in the next few months or so) because Willow was developed. Not to mention the media keep paraphrasing and adding things to make an article spicy.

I did some research in past, but got conflicting information. One source says 1500 qubits[1], while other says 13 million qubits[2]. I think there are stuff i don't understand, but i doubt 1500 qubits estimation is true.

[1] https://security.stackexchange.com/a/96880
[2] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/02/breaking-245-bit-elliptic-curve-encryption-with-a-quantum-computer.html

[target]

--snip--

How true is this quantum computer able to hack Bitcoin?

It depends on what you mean by hack. But AFAIK quantum computer with sufficient qubits can crack private key of an address when it's public key it's known. I have no idea when will such quantum computer can be created though.

Looks like the treat will make people sell their BTC before this quantum computer will be able to hack everyone's addresses. Sending its price as low as possible and will not be able to attract investors until they are sure its safe. If it can hack Bitcoin then all other altcoins are not safe too.

I expect there will be quantum resistant address on Bitcoin, so people have time to move their Bitcoin some time before it could happen.

What a relief. The young guys still have the time to move their coins to a new address. But I do hope it will be quantum resistance and there ain't the need for BTC to be moved to a new address because that would mean the people who created this quantum computer does have the motivation to develop further to catch up that new BTC addresses again.

It will just be a battle of who can make it better while we thought no one can crack BTC.

[bitmover]

Microsoft just released this:

Microsoft today introduced Majorana 1, the world’s first quantum chip powered by a new Topological Core architecture that it expects will realize quantum computers capable of solving meaningful, industrial-scale problems in years, not decades.

https://news.microsoft.com/source/features/innovation/microsofts-majorana-1-chip-carves-new-path-for-quantum-computing/

Looks like Microsoft will release quantum computer chips much sooner than expected,  just years not decades.

I think we will see changes in cryptography sooner than expected

[ABCbits]

Microsoft just released this:

Microsoft today introduced Majorana 1, the world’s first quantum chip powered by a new Topological Core architecture that it expects will realize quantum computers capable of solving meaningful, industrial-scale problems in years, not decades.

https://news.microsoft.com/source/features/innovation/microsofts-majorana-1-chip-carves-new-path-for-quantum-computing/

Looks like Microsoft will release quantum computer chips much sooner than expected,  just years not decades.

I think we will see changes in cryptography sooner than expected

Fortunately NIST already finalize several quantum resistant cryptography, so it's matter of implementation and adaption at this point. Although i have doubt they'll create quantum computers with million qubits that soon, when they currently create ones with 8 qubits and other company struggle to build ones with much more qubits without error.

Today, the company has placed eight topological qubits on a chip designed to scale to one million.