PQC - What is our Goal, Even?

The recent discourse in the Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) community highlights a divergence in fundamental goals among participants, which often leads to unproductive discussions. The primary objective should be to maximize the security of Bitcoin by reducing the likelihood of needing a community-led fork to destroy stolen coins once Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computers (CRQC) become a reality. This goal involves concentrating efforts on securing wallets that are least likely to migrate their holdings into safer configurations, rather than those who are already likely to take protective measures.

Many popular wallets like Bitcoin.com, Trust Wallet, Coinbase Wallet, and Blockchain.com tend to use static single addresses, which simplifies operations but increases vulnerability. These platforms often prioritize user-friendliness and broad token support over advanced security measures specific to Bitcoin, making them critical targets for enhanced security initiatives. Such wallets are typically found at the top of app store listings and are not well-equipped to adopt new standards, including those necessary for post-quantum security.

While it might seem beneficial to focus on developing the most sophisticated post-quantum security solutions for advanced setups or to design the ideal signature scheme for future scenarios involving CRQC, these are not immediate priorities. Such efforts do not directly contribute to the overarching goal of minimizing potential coin theft and may even detract from focusing resources on more vulnerable areas. Furthermore, any future adjustments to Bitcoin’s transaction handling, such as witness discounts or increased block sizes to accommodate larger post-quantum signatures, should be deferred until such changes become immediately necessary. Engaging in these discussions prematurely does not align with current strategic needs.