SShortSingh.
Back to feed

Blockchain Encryption Faces Quantum Threat as Post-Quantum Deadline Looms for 2030

0
·1 views

The cryptographic foundations of major blockchains like Bitcoin and Ethereum — including elliptic curve signatures and SHA-256 hashing — are under growing scrutiny as quantum computing advances. Shor's algorithm, developed in 1997, could allow a sufficiently powerful quantum computer to break elliptic curve and RSA-based signature schemes in polynomial rather than exponential time. Researchers now estimate that quantum computers may compromise Bitcoin's signature scheme with fewer qubits than previously believed. In response, regulators in the US and EU are mandating that critical infrastructure transition to post-quantum cryptographic algorithms by 2030. While signature schemes and key exchange protocols are most at risk, hash functions like SHA-256 and symmetric encryption such as AES are considered relatively resilient, though Grover's algorithm does offer quantum computers some speedup against hash-based systems.

Read the full story at DEV Community

This is an AI-generated summary. ShortSingh links to the original source for the complete article.

Discussion (0)

Log in to join the discussion and vote.

Log in

Related stories

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Seven Common Reasons RAG Chatbots Fail in Production and How to Fix Them

RAG chatbots that perform well in demos often break down in production due to architectural flaws rather than model limitations, according to a technical guide published on DEV Community. The core problem is that most systems are built as a single monolithic LLM call with a static vector store, which cannot handle unpredictable real-world queries or constantly changing data. A modular architecture is recommended, separating concerns into distinct layers for orchestration, retrieval, generation, and output validation. The guide also highlights that retrieval should not be limited to vector databases alone, as production systems often need to query SQL databases, REST APIs, and file systems simultaneously. The article provides TypeScript-based blueprints to help developers build more reliable and scalable RAG systems suitable for use cases like customer support and internal knowledge assistants.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

HTTP/3 Is Not a Silver Bullet for Unity Game Networking, Developers Warned

A technical guide targeting Unity 6.3–6.5 developers cautions against assuming HTTP/3 automatically improves game performance. The article breaks down three protocol tiers — HTTP/1.1, HTTP/2, and HTTP/3 — across distinct use cases including REST APIs, asset delivery, and real-time networking. HTTP/2 is recommended as the practical baseline, with HTTP/3 considered only when real-device testing on lossy mobile links demonstrates measurable gains. Real-time game state synchronization should rely on dedicated solutions like Photon or Unity Transport rather than HTTP protocol upgrades. Developers are also warned about HTTP/3 edge cases, including UDP port restrictions on some networks and replay risks with QUIC's 0-RTT feature.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Developer Builds Free In-Browser SQL Practice Tool Targeting Industry Interview Gaps

A developer created dataDrill after failing a MAANG technical interview that required advanced SQL skills not taught in his college database course. The platform runs a real PostgreSQL engine entirely in the browser via WebAssembly, requiring no installation or configuration. It features over 90 SQL questions sourced from technical screens at companies like Meta, Google, Stripe, and Netflix, focusing on window functions, self-joins, and date math. Each challenge includes line-by-line solution explanations to help users understand syntax rather than just copying answers. Several difficult questions are available for free, with the tool aimed at CS graduates and junior developers preparing for data engineering or analyst roles.

0
ProgrammingDEV Community ·

Developer Compares Building the Same Security App on macOS and Linux

A developer built the same background security application on both macOS and Linux, documenting the contrasting experiences. On macOS, they found a tightly controlled environment where Apple's code signing, notarization, and entitlements system restricts what apps can do but builds user trust automatically. Linux offered far greater freedom — allowing low-level system access via tools like fanotify and nftables — but required manual configuration and placed full responsibility for security on the developer. The author concludes that the core difference lies not in available tools but in how each platform assigns responsibility for trust and safety. They note that macOS holds official UNIX 03 certification, while Linux, despite sharing Unix conventions, has never been formally certified.