The measures seek to prevent malicious actors from deriving private keys.
The proposal recognizes that its implementation would imply changes in the protocol and greater demands.
The BitMEX research team republished a report on April 14 examining different strategies to reduce the impact that a possible blocking of cryptocurrencies and bitcoins (BTC) stored in addresses vulnerable to the threat of quantum computing would have.
Among the proposed measures are preventive mechanisms that would prevent the use of BTC hosted in these exposed addresses. The objective is to stop possible attackers who try to reconstruct private keyskeeping the funds temporarily immobilized until the true owner can validate his control through more secure methods, as reported by CriptoNoticias in another series of recommendations published by the team previously.
On this occasion, the initiative proposes a conditional system: instead of automatically blocking vulnerable coins (as bip-361 proposes), The freeze would only be activated if it is verifiably demonstrated that quantum technology capable of breaking cryptography already exists.. To do this, it explores five recovery methods, which should be considered an alternative or complement to the schemes explained above, although it warns that doing so would imply technical complexity, changes in the protocol and new demands for the nodes of the Bitcoin network.
BIP-361
The discussion intensifies after the proposal BIP-361that proposes a two-stage process: First, restrict sending to vulnerable addresses for three years and then completely block those funds two years later.
Its critics warn that this approach affects Bitcoin’s censorship resistance and puts the responsibility on users to protect their assets. They also question that there is not enough evidence to justify a scheduled freeze.
The approach and background of the canary
As an alternative, a “canary” system is proposed that replaces the automatic freeze with a surveillance state. Under this model, vulnerable currencies would continue to operate normally until real proof of quantum attack is detected.
If that proof occurs through a verifiable transaction, the freeze would be activated immediately, thus avoiding unnecessary measures.
On the other hand, to encourage the activation of the system, It is proposed to create a reward fund to which users could contribute bitcoins. Thus, anyone who demonstrates quantum capacity would have an incentive to do so publicly.
However, there is a risk that the incentive will not be sufficient compared to other possible gains, although regulated actors could prefer this mechanism for legal or reputational reasons.
NUMS and special address
The system is based on an address generated with the “Nothing-Up-My-Sleeve” method, which guarantees that no one knows your private key. Even so, the address is valid within Bitcoin. This implies that any expense from that address would be evidence that the cryptography has been compromised, functioning as an automatic trigger for the emergency protocol.
The security window
This option would allow vulnerable currencies to continue to be used, but with temporary restrictions before they can be spent again.
If the canary is activated during that period, the funds are frozen; If not, they regain their normal use. This margin seeks to reduce the impact of hasty decisions and allow reaction to possible simultaneous developments.
Finally, BitMEX’s proposals can be read as a technical response to proposals such as that of developer Jameson Lopp, who, as reported by CriptoNoticias, suggested burning exposed BTC as a way to deal with quantum risk, which according to Google research could be closer than it seems.