I already wrote a thread breaking down Google Quantum AI's paper on breaking Bitcoin's elliptic-curve signatures. This blog post goes deeper. It covers what the thread couldn't fit. Taproot's specific exposure window: P2TR addresses leak tweaked public keys on-chain, giving an

1/11: I've been working on something for a while. What started as scattered writing and tools around post-quantum cryptography has taken a shape I'm genuinely happy with. Encryptorium: an applied cryptography research platform focused on the problems practitioners actually face

11/11: If you're working on PQC migration, ZK system security, or post-quantum compliance, I'd like to hear from you. What's hard? What's missing? encryptorium.com Onward. encryptorium

PQC migration plans have a ZK blind spot. NIST IR 8547 (draft), the UK NCSC's 2025 PQC timeline, and EU Recommendation 2024/1101 all describe PQC migration roadmaps. None of them discuss zero-knowledge verifiers or ZK verification infrastructure. That matters because some

1/5: My take on the QSB paper by Avihu Levy ✨🐺 (StarkWare 🥷), dropped April 9. It shows how to build a Shor-resistant spend path inside today's legacy Bitcoin Script, no soft fork. Clever and narrow, it makes the case for a protocol-level PQ signature louder, not quieter.

Quick question for writers publishing with HackerNoon | Learn Any Technology: How long do your stories usually stay in editorial before they go live? I’ve got 2 in there right now, one for 10 days and one for 11, and I’m curious whether that is pretty normal or unusually long.

Here are the PQC resources that really shaped how I think about post-quantum migration so far. If I missed your favorite PQC resource, paper, or person to follow, drop it in the replies so others can learn from it too 👇 🧱 Standards/foundations The PQC project from Cybersecurity @ NIST

What Google’s new quantum paper really says about Bitcoin: lower attack costs, no immediate break, and why Taproot exposure matters. #cryptocurrency #pqc...Show more

My first HackerNoon | Learn Any Technology article is live, and I won’t pretend I’m not grinning. I broke down Google Quantum AI’s new paper: fewer than 500,000 qubits to break Bitcoin’s secp256k1, a 20× cut from prior estimates. A resource estimate is not a timeline. Migration is the bottleneck.

Very proud to see HackerNoon | Learn Any Technology share my article. HackerNoon picked up my article on Google Quantum AI’s new Bitcoin paper. I wrote it to cut through the hype and get to what actually matters: lower resource estimates are important, but migration is still the real bottleneck.

Second HackerNoon | Learn Any Technology piece is live. I broke down Avihu Levy’s QSB construction: quantum-safe Bitcoin spending using existing script rules, with no soft fork. The trick is grinding inputs until RIPEMD-160 yields a value that parses as a valid DER-encoded ECDSA signature, giving

Third HackerNoon | Learn Any Technology article landed. 😊 This one is different: research notes from an unfinished paper, shared to invite criticism, counterexamples, and discussion. My working claim is that post-quantum ZK is not mainly a parameter problem. It is an architecture problem. The real

STARKs are built on hash-based commitments and coding-theoretic machinery like FRI, which avoids the main Shor-vulnerable assumptions behind pairing- and discrete-log-based proof systems. But some implementations add a final SNARK wrapper for cheaper on-chain verification. RISC

Google says breaking Bitcoin's ECDSA signatures takes 500,000 physical qubits. That is ~20x fewer than prior estimates. But the paper is not a timeline forecast. It is a cost estimate. Full breakdown, 16 min: youtube.com/watch?v=wj3Y0V… #PostQuantumCryptography #Bitcoin

On April 9, a paper proposed quantum-safe Bitcoin spends with no soft fork. QSB is the escape hatch. It protects legacy coins already inside a QSB-locked output, not coins still in ECDSA wallets. Full breakdown: youtube.com/watch?v=HTycKV… #PostQuantumCryptography #Bitcoin

Practitioner counter to PQC fear marketing. Three things to do this week, none of which require buying a migration platform first: 1. Pick one service you own end-to-end and do cryptographic discovery. A CBOM in CycloneDX 1.6 is the right artifact. A deliberately incomplete

1/11 Solana (Solana / Solana Foundation) published "Quantum Readiness" this week. Anza and Firedancer 🔥💃🏻 chose Falcon independently. That is a credible engineering signal. The framing around the engineering is the part worth reading carefully.

blueshift 11/11 A week ago I wrote about PQC fear-selling. This is the inverse failure mode from the same root: fear-sellers substitute urgency; L1 announcements substitute reassurance. Full piece: encryptorium.medium.com/solanas-quantu…

A week ago I wrote about PQC fear-selling. This week Solana published "Quantum Readiness." Same anti-pattern from opposite ends. Vendors substitute urgency for discovery. L1 announcements substitute reassurance for discovery. Both skip the same step: the actual threat model.

I need to get this off my chest: the way some people talk about post-quantum migration genuinely grinds my gears. Not because they are worried about quantum computers. They should be. Not because they ask about hybrid algorithms. That is a valid question. What grinds my gears