Protecting Solana from potential quantum computer attacks would make the network about 90% slower than its current configuration, according to an April 4 statement from Project Eleven CEO Alex Pruden. Pruden’s conclusion emerged after a series of tests performed using post-quantum digital signatures. testnet We are conducting research on Solana in cooperation with the Solana Foundation.
The post-quantum signatures that Project Eleven tested on the testnet are: “20 times, 40 times heavier”as Mr. Pruden explained in an interview.
Cryptoasset networks like Solana generate a digital signature every time a user approves a transaction. Encrypted proof that you are the owner of the funds. This signature is sent with the transaction and must be verified by a network validation tool before being processed.
Solana currently uses a fixed size signature of 64 bytes. Using the growth factors shown by Pruden, the new signatures weigh between 1,280 and 2,560 bytes per transaction.
This means each transaction takes up more space and requires more computation for validation. The result is simple. If each transaction is heavy, The network can process fewer transactions per second. The larger the weight of a company, the smaller the capacity of the network.
Despite this result, Project Eleven’s manager admitted that “there is something concrete…we have a testnet with post-quantum signatures.” He added that the Solana Foundation “deserves recognition for at least wanting to be involved and take action.”
As previously reported by CriptoNoticias, Project 11 is a company developing anti-quantum solutions for Bitcoin and crypto asset networks and is working with the Solana Foundation to prepare networks for quantum threats.
Solana’s structural weaknesses
Pruden also pointed out that differences in the design of Solana and other networks open up their potential for eventual exposure to quantum computing scenarios.
For Bitcoin and Ethereum (using the ECDSA scheme), the wallet address Derived from public key hash functionwhich delays publication until the moment the user signs the transaction. However, in Solana, the address directly matches the public key, and the public key is visible on the network from account creation.
This distinction is important because quantum attacks on digital signatures aim to derive a private key from a public key. In networks where the public key is not readily disclosed, Adds a temporary layer of protection: An attacker must first gain access to the key, or spend money and wait for it to be made public.
However, that protection is not permanent. With Bitcoin and Ethereum, once an address is used, the public key is made public, exposing them to the same kind of theoretical risks. In this context, the difference with Solana is not the presence or absence of vulnerabilities; But the moment that revelation occurs.
Under this framework, Mr. Pruden said: “100% of the network is vulnerable”related to the fact that every account in Solana has a public key visible from the beginning.
Another post-quantum proposal for Solana
In January of this year, developer Dean Little released Winternitz Vaults. Vault that generates new keys for every transaction As reported by CriptoNoticias, it uses cryptography that is resistant to quantum attacks. They do not protect the entire network, but the individual wallets that choose to use them.
Similarly, the experimental use of these anti-quantum vaults was highlighted by the recent Google Quantum AI report.
The results of the Solana test demonstrate the strain that all crypto asset networks will face, not just online banking and digital systems in general. The transition to post-quantum cryptography is not just a technical issue, but a design decision that directly impacts users.
(Tag Translation) Blockchain
