Author: Matt Corallo 2021-03-15 22:48:21
Published on: 2021-03-15T22:48:21+00:00
A discussion on the trade-offs of Taproot and quantum computing has been brought up again on the bitcoin-dev mailing list. Luke Dashjr stated that Taproot loses an important safety protection against quantum computing, and that Bitcoin could be endangered if a full quantum-safe fix is not developed before QC goes online. However, Matt Corallo argues that the issue has been discussed thoroughly and ultimately it falls apart because of the amount of Bitcoin that could be stolen by any QC-wielding attacker due to address reuse. Moreover, there were suggestions that the storage space required for Taproot transactions can be materially reduced by avoiding the hash indirection. However, one respondent pointed out that this would result in significantly higher CPU usage and lack of ability to batch-validate. Despite this, Corallo believes that adding a hash on top in an additional softfork is fairly trivial and could fix this problem. Finally, in response to Pieter's argument that 37% of Bitcoin supply is at risk, the group discussed how the situation could be improved through social efforts discouraging address use, but Corallo expressed doubt as this has been attempted for nine years without much success. The discussion also included the idea that when or if quantum does compromise these coins, so long as they are neglected or abandoned/lost coins, it can be seen as equivalent to Bitcoin mining.
Updated on: 2023-05-21T01:58:19.268708+00:00