Giving teeth to expected EC disabling: P2XX(-T)(-ML)

The discussion revolves around the practicality and necessity of implementing a 192-bit canary within cryptographic protocols, specifically in relation to Bitcoin's libsecp256k1. The primary argument against the implementation centers on the complexity and limited reuse potential of existing cryptographic libraries, notably libsecp256k1, which is highly optimized for a specific prime and does not lend itself well to a generic framework necessary for supporting a 192-bit canary. This specialized optimization complicates engineering efforts without offering significant benefits, as the expected disabling of ECC (Elliptic Curve Cryptography) due to quantum computing advancements is anticipated to occur through community consensus rather than being triggered by cryptographic mechanisms like a tripwire.

Moreover, there is skepticism about the effectiveness of a canary in weaker curves or configurations that significantly deviate from established standards such as secp256k1. The concern is that even if a weaker curve could be implemented with some shared characteristics (like field arithmetic), its real-world relevance and the likelihood of it being targeted by quantum computers (QRQC) are questionable. The discussion extends to the design of cryptographic triggers and the use of multiple hash functions in constructing a robust mechanism to signal an ECC break, potentially involving Schnorr signatures as a proof method rather than direct disclosure of a discrete logarithm problem (DLP) solution.

Additionally, the idea of using simple triggers based on transaction outputs (UTXO) spending conditions that integrate seamlessly with existing blockchain and transaction validation logic is favored for its simplicity and minimal disruption to current systems. This approach avoids the complexities associated with integrating new cryptographic constructs or relying on cooperative quantum-resistant cryptographic computations (CRQC) that may not align with practical deployment scenarios or security objectives. Overall, the focus leans towards maintaining simplicity in cryptographic enhancements and ensuring broad consensus in changes to foundational security components.