Posted by leishman
Feb 13, 2026/18:20 UTC
The discussion revolves around the effectiveness and necessity of a proposed change in Bitcoin's protocol to enhance its quantum resistance. The person highlights an existing solution, Pay-to-Witness-Script-Hash (P2WSH), that already offers similar security guarantees without necessitating any modifications to the current protocol. This points to a perspective that introducing additional complexity might not be justified, especially for addressing concerns related to tapscript's vulnerability to quantum computing threats. The critique is rooted in the argument that the proposed change, while aiming to be the "first step in advancing Bitcoin quantum resistance," lacks a compelling justification for why it should precede other potential alternatives.
Furthermore, there's an inquiry about the possibility of future quantum-resistant measures, such as hash-based signatures, being incorporated under the same proposed framework (P2TSH). The critical feedback for the proposal's author centers on the need for a more definitive argument supporting the proposition that this specific change should lead the way in fortifying Bitcoin against quantum computing risks. This encapsulates a broader discussion on prioritization and strategy in enhancing the cryptocurrency's security infrastructure amidst evolving technological challenges.
Thread Summary (21 replies)
Dec 19 - Feb 13, 2026
22 messages
TLDR
We’ll email you summaries of the latest discussions from high signal bitcoin sources, like bitcoin-dev, lightning-dev, and Delving Bitcoin.
We'd love to hear your feedback on this project.
Give Feedback