Blockchain protocols preparing for the quantum computing threat must also consider how to quickly verify ownership if funds are stolen, according to the development team behind the NEAR Protocol. While most of the industry conversation has focused on preventing quantum attacks on private keys, a deeper problem may emerge once those keys are compromised: proving who actually owns the assets.
The ownership verification gap
Concerns that quantum computers could eventually break blockchain cryptography have fueled widespread anxiety about wallet security. But Anton Astafiev, chief technology officer of Near One, argues that the industry has overlooked a critical second step. ‘We won’t be able to tell if someone running a transaction is the rightful owner of the asset or not,’ Astafiev said on Wednesday. He warned that protocols would be forced to make difficult decisions, such as freezing compromised wallets or allowing a ‘wild west’ scenario where stolen assets move freely.
Also read: LMAX Group launches Kiosk portal for digital asset collateral trading
Zero-knowledge proofs as a potential solution
Astafiev suggested that zero-knowledge proof technology could enable the rightful owner to demonstrate knowledge of the original seed phrase without revealing sensitive information. ‘This is one example of how research across blockchain ecosystems is essential and valuable as everyone prepares for quantum unknowns,’ he added. Near One is actively researching how to solve the problem of distinguishing legitimate transactions from those executed by attackers using compromised keys.
Timeline for quantum risk accelerates
The push comes after researchers at Google and the California Institute of Technology said in March that functional quantum computers could arrive sooner than expected. They claimed that quantum computers could potentially break Bitcoin’s cryptography within 10 minutes, enabling an ‘on-spend’ attack. NEAR developers are building a post-quantum-safe signing system called ‘FIPS-204,’ approved by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, which is set to launch on testnet by the end of the second quarter.
Also read: Bitcoin wavers near $81K as US CPI hits highest since 2023 on oil price surge
Industry-wide preparations
Other crypto ecosystems are also taking action. The Ethereum Foundation created the Post-Quantum Ethereum team to build quantum solutions into the protocol by 2029. Two of Solana’s validator clients, Anza and Firedancer, have implemented a test version of Falcon, a new post-quantum signature solution. The Bitcoin community has begun exploring the issue, though Blockstream CEO Adam Back said in April that current quantum computers are ‘basically lab experiments’ and recommended developers start building solutions now.
Conclusion
As quantum computing advances faster than previously expected, the blockchain industry faces not only the challenge of securing private keys but also the equally complex task of proving ownership after a breach. Near One’s focus on zero-knowledge proofs highlights a growing recognition that cryptographic resilience must include both prevention and post-attack verification. With over $137.6 million in user funds secured on NEAR, the stakes are high for developing practical solutions before quantum threats materialize.
FAQs
Q1: What is the main quantum threat to blockchain?
A1: Quantum computers could eventually break the cryptographic algorithms that secure blockchain private keys, allowing attackers to steal funds or impersonate wallet owners.
Q2: How could zero-knowledge proofs help after a quantum attack?
A2: Zero-knowledge proofs allow a user to prove they know the original seed phrase of a wallet without revealing the phrase itself, helping distinguish rightful owners from attackers who have compromised the key.
Q3: When are quantum computers expected to threaten blockchain security?
A3: Recent research from Google and Caltech suggests functional quantum computers could arrive sooner than previously estimated, potentially breaking Bitcoin’s cryptography within minutes. However, some experts believe practical threats remain years or decades away.
Be the first to comment