Quantum computer ‘threat’ to crypto is exaggerated

As a seasoned cybersecurity professional with over two decades of experience under my belt, I must admit that the latest claims about potentially breaking RSA encryption have piqued my interest, but not my optimism. Over the years, I’ve learned to take such bold statements with a healthy dose of skepticism. Claims of breaking RSA are as common as finding a four-leaf clover in a field, and until someone else verifies these results, we should remain cautious.

A report that Chinese researchers have employed a D-Wave quantum computer to breach encryption algorithms used to secure bank accounts, top-secret military data and crypto wallets is at first glance a matter for deep concern.

In a peer-reviewed article published by Shanghai University researchers and reported by the South China Morning Post on October 11th, it’s stated that for the first time, a genuine quantum computer has presented a tangible and significant risk to various algorithms based on Substitution-Permutation Network structures that are widely used today.

The paper talks about breaking RSA (Rivest-Shamir-Adleman) encryption, one of the oldest and widely used public-key cryptosystems.

Due to limited information available and the ongoing secrecy surrounding a recent study, it’s challenging to definitively assess the potential severity of threats to cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology. As of October 11th, the research paper hasn’t been published in English, and the researchers have declined interviews, citing the subject’s sensitivity, as reported by South China Morning Post.

If the researchers’ findings prove reliable and can be replicated by others, it signifies a significant advancement in the development of quantum computing, as stated by Marek Narozniak, a physicist with expertise in quantum computing and founder at sqrtxx.com, to CryptoMoon.

Could it be possible that the password-based security measures employed across various sectors such as banking and cryptocurrencies may become susceptible to attacks, as some are concerned about?

According to Massimiliano Sala, Full Professor and Head of the Cryptography Lab at the University of Trento, due to insufficient details in the paper, it proves challenging to offer a conclusive response.

The success of the experiment hinges upon the scientists’ ability to crack RSA keys of a particular magnitude, which are comparable in size to those employed by banks for safeguarding customers’ savings and checking accounts. However, Sala stated that there is currently no indication of this being achieved.

But if they had, it would be “huge,” he said.

Quantum Computing (QC) – a form of computing that employs the spin of atoms rather than electrical charges to represent binary digits 1’s and 0’s – is growing rapidly, according to many. However, large-scale quantum devices with practical applications are still not widely available.

The D-Wave machines used in Shanghai, sometimes called quantum annealers, are really proto-quantum computers, or forerunners, capable of conducting specialized tasks only.

Quantum computer ‘threat’ to crypto is exaggerated — For now

If and as soon as universal quantum computers become a reality, there are concerns that they might pose a threat to the elliptic curve cryptography currently used by Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, which have functioned effectively up until this point.

Quantum computers might soon have the ability to find large prime numbers essential for Bitcoin’s private keys, given there are no preventative measures in place.

Sala pointed out that while it’s important to remember that D-Wave quantum computers are not versatile enough to be classified as general-purpose quantum computers, their capability to factor RSA keys had been demonstrated by a colleague just a few months prior.

Professor Takaya Miyano from Ritsumeikan University’s Mechanical Engineering department voiced doubts about the researchers’ findings, much like Professor Sala did.

Shanghai researchers found the integer they factored, at 22 bits, to be significantly smaller than the typical length of RSA integers, which range from or exceed 1024 bits (such as 1024, 2048, and a maximum of 4096 bits), according to their statement to CryptoMoon.

In addition, Miyano explained that the D-wave machine functions as a quantum simulator, specifically designed for optimizing problems, not as a universal computer. It’s uncertain if it could perform swift factoring of large RSA numbers in practical applications.

Why prime factorization is important

In simpler terms, factorization is the mathematical process of breaking down a number into smaller components (prime numbers) that, when multiplied together, give the original number. For example, 12 can be broken down as 3 x 2 x 2. Efficient prime number factorization is considered the “holy grail” in the context of cryptography, particularly for RSA public-key systems, since it could potentially help in cracking these encryption methods.

Recent: $556M in spot Bitcoin ETF inflows signals major shift in investor sentiment

RSA goes beyond just encryption; it’s also a method for generating unique pairs of keys. This process often involves multiplying two large prime numbers. For instance, in a common scenario like a bank and its customer, both parties are provided with a set of these prime numbers. They use these numbers to calculate their respective private and public keys, as Narozniak pointed out.

Creating both private and public keys involves a complex process, but here’s a simplified explanation: If ‘p’ and ‘q’ are two large prime numbers, and ‘n’ is their product (i.e., n equals p multiplied by q), then it can be said that the prime numbers ‘p’ and ‘q’ have a connection to the private keys, while ‘n’ is associated with the public key.

In simple terms, the core mathematical concept underlying RSA encryption lies in the fact that multiplying two prime numbers is effortless, but finding the original prime numbers from their product turns out to be incredibly challenging. As the size of these numbers increases, this task grows even more difficult.

Earlier this year, Sala’s colleagues at the University of Trento employed a quantum annealer to discover the two prime factors of the number 8,219,999, namely 32,749 and 251. According to the researchers, “to the best of our knowledge, this is the largest number that has ever been factorized using a quantum device.

According to Sala, the Shanghai University’s latest paper is important “provided it offers a method for breaking down large numbers.

Researchers at the University of Trento additionally highlighted the significant ability of quantum computing to tackle intricate issues that have traditionally been considered “unsolvable” by conventional computers.

The process of decomposing a number into its fundamental building blocks (primes) is known as prime factorization. Notably, this problem can potentially be efficiently addressed using quantum computing techniques, particularly quantum annealing.

Crypto keys are safe — For now

Suppose it’s plausible that Shanghai researchers discovered a method to employ a quantum annealer to crack cryptographic methods, even ones fundamental to the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES), which is extensively utilized in both the military and financial sectors. How might this impact the crypto industry?

Narozniak stated that symmetric ciphers like AES-128, employed for data encryption, aren’t susceptible to such attacks because these ciphers don’t depend on the process of number factorization.

There might be exceptions, of course, like if the cipher is a shared secret derived via RSA-based key exchange protocol, he continued. But “properly encrypted passwords and other data in general will remain encrypted even if the approach presented in that research scales up and becomes widely available — and if true,” he said.

A history of unproven RSA claims

Narozniak advised against jumping to premature conclusions. “Let’s hold off on revising our optimism until the result is reproduced and verified by others,” he suggested. “It’s important to remember that claims about cracking the RSA encryption aren’t unusual.

By way of example, in the early months of 2023, some Chinese scientists reportedly managed to decrypt a 48-bit key using a 10-qubit quantum computer. However, it’s important to note that this claim has not yet undergone peer review, according to Narozniak’s comments.

“And two years before that Claus Schnorr, who is an authority in the community, made an honest mistake and claimed RSA to be broken. I personally take such big claims with a grain of salt.”

As per Sala’s explanation, if RSA were to be broken, it would require updates in many software systems, but the overall structure wouldn’t undergo a significant transformation. This is because there are already existing standards such as elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), which is currently used for securing Bitcoin transactions, that can serve as viable alternatives. He further noted…

“More drastic would be the impact on credit cards and the like, which would have to be withdrawn massively, to radically change their software.”

One might wonder why cryptocurrencies are not using RSA widely — as banks do. The crypto industry favors elliptic-curve cryptography because ECC makes it possible to achieve the same level of security with much smaller keys using fewer bytes, said Narozniak. This opens up digital space which enables chains to grow faster.

Is Buterin’s ‘hard fork’ solution viable?

In March, Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, proposed that in the event of a quantum attack on Ethereum, a “hard fork” could be implemented as a countermeasure. He explained on October 17th that Ethereum is already prepared to execute a relatively straightforward recovery fork to handle such a scenario. If this were necessary, users might need to download updated wallet software, but the majority should be able to retain their funds without loss.

Narozniak expressed his disagreement by saying, “I don’t think a hard fork like that would be as straightforward.” Furthermore, he pointed out that future quantum-safe signatures, such as ML-DSA, might require much larger keys and signatures. This could potentially lead to slower transaction processing times on the blockchain and higher gas fees.

Implementing a hard fork would prove to be intricate, necessitate widespread agreement within the community, and might not recover all lost assets or completely rebuild trust in the network, according to Samuel Mugel, CTO at Multiverse Computing. Consequently, it’s imperative to adopt quantum-resistant cryptography as a preventive measure against such attacks, so as to circumvent this predicament.

Safeguards are needed

“We most certainly need to revisit our current cybersecurity defenses,” Christos Makridis, associate research professor at Arizona State University and CEO/Founder of Dainamic, told CryptoMoon.

Recent: Indicted NYC mayor leaves questionable crypto legacy as controversy mounts

As a researcher, I find it crucial to emphasize the importance of focusing on network capacity loads, particularly in light of defending against Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, and strengthening password security to safeguard data from potential cyber threats in our quantum computing era. It’s clear that these aspects require increased attention to ensure robust cybersecurity.

“One of the emerging views is that the expansion of quantum computing and generative AI has enabled offensive cyber more than defensive.”

The industry can’t become complacent. “Dangerous quantum computers will come, it’s just a matter of time,” Sala warned.

He emphasized the need for swift preparation in the realm of blockchain technology. This should involve mapping out a strategy leading towards adopting quantum-resistant encryption, also known as post-quantum cryptography. These measures should be robust enough to withstand potential attacks not only from standard adversaries, but even from advanced quantum ones.

2024-10-21 16:12

Why prime factorization is important

Crypto keys are safe — For now

A history of unproven RSA claims

Is Buterin’s ‘hard fork’ solution viable?

Safeguards are needed

Read More