paint-brush
The Risks of Quantum Mining: What Bitcoin Users Need to Knowby@escholar

The Risks of Quantum Mining: What Bitcoin Users Need to Know

by EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars
EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars HackerNoon profile picture

EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars

@escholar

We publish the best academic work (that's too often lost...

January 12th, 2025
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story in a terminal
Print this story
Read this story w/o Javascript
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

This section discusses the impact of quantum computing on Bitcoin’s security, particularly focusing on stale blocks caused by aggressive mining, and suggests protocol changes to mitigate risks.
featured image - The Risks of Quantum Mining: What Bitcoin Users Need to Know
1x
Read by Dr. One voice-avatar

Listen to this story

EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars HackerNoon profile picture
EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars

EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars

@escholar

We publish the best academic work (that's too often lost to peer reviews & the TA's desk) to the global tech community

About @escholar
LEARN MORE ABOUT @ESCHOLAR'S
EXPERTISE AND PLACE ON THE INTERNET.
0-item

STORY’S CREDIBILITY

Academic Research Paper

Academic Research Paper

Part of HackerNoon's growing list of open-source research papers, promoting free access to academic material.

Abstract and I. Introduction

A. Quantum Bitcoin Mining

B. Our Contribution

C. Comparison with Related Works

D. Conventions

II. Background

A. Bitcoin Basics

B. Bitcoin Security

C. Grover’s Search Algorithm

D. Quantum Attacks

III. Approach

A. Algorithm

B. Markov Chain

C. Assumptions and Approximations

IV. Results

A. Probability of Success

B. Performance Measures

C. Example Application

V. Discussion, Acknowledgments, and References

D. Quantum Attacks

In [4], Aggarwal et al. analyze the effect of quantum computation on the security of Bitcoin. As part of this analysis, they calculate the number of qubits and gate speed a quantum computer would need to dominate the Bitcoin network’s computing power and, as a result, be capable of a 51% attack. Using this analysis, they predict that “it will be some time before quantum computers out compete classical machines for this task and when they do, a single quantum computer will not have majority hashing power.” The analysis accounts for both parallelization of Grover’s search and the overhead from quantum error correction.


In [21], Sattath takes a different approach to the determining the implications of quantum computing to Bitcoin security. He shows that the properties of quantum Bitcoin mining lead to security risks even if no single miner dominates the networks computing power. This reduction in security comes from stale blocks. If a quantum miner receives a block midway through performing Grover’s search algorithm, they can perform a measurement of their quantum register, and with probability higher than random guessing, mine a block. This procedure is called aggressive mining, whereas peaceful mining refers to the procedure in which the quantum miner ends their search if they learn of another block. If many quantum miners follow an aggressive procedure, then with higher probability than classically, two blocks are found at nearly the same time by different miners, creating many stale blocks. This result is important because it shows quantum mining poses security risks simply because the process of quantum mining is different than classical mining, not because quantum mining is more effective.


Sattath conjectures that if quantum miners must commit to the number of Grover iterations they will apply before measuring, then the stale block rates are minimal. He proposes a change in the Bitcoin protocol that would force quantum miners to decide before they begin mining a block how many Grover iterations they will apply. This change in protocol is incompatible with proposed fixes for insecurities arising from selfish mining techniques [8].


Determining the rate of stale blocks with Sattath’s proposed change is a challenging game theory question. This question is addressed in [17], where Lee et al. analyze a class of games they call quantum races in which multiple quantum capable players compete to solve a computational problem first. In many cases, they confirm Sattath’s conjecture of low stale block rates.


Authors:

(1) Robert R. Nerem, Institute for Quantum Science and Technology, University of Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada (riley.nerem@gmail.com);

(2) Daya R. Gaur, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Lethbridge, Alberta T1K 3M4, Canada.


This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license.


L O A D I N G
. . . comments & more!

About Author

EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars HackerNoon profile picture
EScholar: Electronic Academic Papers for Scholars@escholar
We publish the best academic work (that's too often lost to peer reviews & the TA's desk) to the global tech community

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN...

Permanent on Arweave
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story in a terminal
 Terminal
Read this story w/o Javascript
Read this story w/o Javascript
 Lite
Also published here
Hackernoon
Bsky