Key Points
- Avalanche’s Emin Gün Sirer suggests freezing early Bitcoin, including coins mined by Satoshi Nakamoto, due to potential threats from quantum computing.
- The proposal has drawn mixed reactions, with some praising its proactive approach and others criticizing it as a threat to Bitcoin’s principles of decentralization and ownership.
Avalanche founder Emin Gün Sirer has stirred up controversy with a proposal to freeze around 1 million Bitcoins, currently valued at approximately $97 billion.
These Bitcoins are believed to have been mined in the early days of the cryptocurrency and are often associated with Bitcoin’s anonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto.
Quantum Computing Threat
However, Sirer’s proposal is not related to the possible return of Bitcoin’s creator.
Instead, it is centered around the potential risks posed by quantum computing to the security of these early coins, which still rely on an older cryptographic standard.
This concern arises shortly after Google announced its new quantum computing chip, “Willow,” which it claims can perform a standard benchmark computation in under five minutes, a task that would take today’s fastest supercomputers 10 septillion years.
While Willow is not yet capable of breaking Bitcoin’s encryption, it represents a significant step towards practical quantum computing.
Sirer suggests that quantum computing could simplify certain operations, such as factoring numbers, while others, like inverting one-way hash functions, would remain just as challenging.
Vulnerability of Early Bitcoin
Bitcoin’s security is generally robust against these advances because it relies on hashing algorithms and elliptic curve cryptography.
However, the same cannot be said for early Bitcoin coins, including those likely mined by Nakamoto.
These early coins used the Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) format, which exposes the public key and provides quantum attackers with more to exploit.
Sirer proposes that the Bitcoin community consider “freezing” coins stored in P2PK addresses or setting a “sunset date” for their usability to protect Bitcoin’s overall integrity from a future where quantum computers might crack P2PK cryptography.
This proposal has been met with both support and criticism.
Some see it as a proactive measure to mitigate risks posed by emerging technology, while others view it as an assault on the principles of decentralization and ownership that Bitcoin embodies.
Most modern Bitcoin wallets use Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash or SegWit formats, which only reveal a hashed version of the public key.
This additional security layer ensures that even if a quantum computer exists, it would first have to invert the hash to extract useful information, a difficult task.
In contrast, P2PK addresses store the public key in plaintext, offering potential attackers a direct starting point for quantum attacks.
Despite the recent quantum developments, computers like Willow are still far from capable of launching such attacks.
“Cracking Bitcoin’s ECDSA 256 encryption would require over 1,000,000 qubits,” wrote Bitcoin entrepreneur Ben Sigman, noting that Willow’s 105 qubits “aren’t even close.”
Criticism of the Proposal
The proposal to freeze Satoshi’s coins has been met with resistance.
Some argue that such a move could compel Satoshi to break his silence and that it could be more damaging to cryptocurrency than someone potentially gaining access.
Others question how to identify and freeze these coins without causing further controversy.
There are also concerns about the precedent this could set for future changes.
Bitcoin’s “killer feature” is its resistance to change, and tampering with its rules could deter users who value its resistance to censorship and interference.
While the risks posed by quantum computing are speculative at this point, Sirer and others believe the crypto community must prepare for potential consequences.
“Realistic attacks on cryptocurrencies are still a long way off,” Sirer wrote. “For now, let’s all watch how quantum computers develop over the next few decades.”