Hoskinson Says Quantum Security Is Ready, Chains Are Early
- Hoskinson warns that premature post-quantum upgrades could cut throughput and weaken nodes.
- NIST standards exist, but current post-quantum schemes are slower and need much larger.
- DARPA 2033 benchmark offers a realistic horizon, favoring phased transitions over rushed.
Charles Hoskinson warned blockchain developers that rushing post-quantum upgrades could harm networks more than help them. The Cardano founder said protection tools already exist, yet hardware and efficiency remain unready. His comments addressed global blockchains, ongoing protocol debates, future quantum risks, and why timing, not design, matters most now.
Post-Quantum Tools Exist, but Costs Remain High
Hoskinson said post-quantum cryptography is no longer theoretical, notably after U.S. standards arrived in 2024. According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, multiple quantum-resistant algorithms now meet formal security requirements.
However, Hoskinson stressed that readiness on paper differs from readiness in live networks. He explained that current post-quantum systems run slower and demand larger signatures. Notably, proof sizes can grow tenfold, while processing speed often drops by the same factor.
As a result, immediate adoption could sharply reduce blockchain throughput. Hoskinson said such changes would directly affect validators and miners. Higher computational loads would raise costs and limit participation.
Consequently, decentralization could weaken before any quantum threat actually appears. While researchers agree that quantum computers could eventually break elliptic-curve cryptography, timelines remain uncertain. Estimates range from a few years to more than a decade.
Therefore, Hoskinson urged developers to avoid acting on speculation alone. This concern leads to the deeper issue of how soon quantum computers will become practically useful. That question, he argued, deserves more attention than protocol redesigns.
DARPA’s 2033 Benchmark and Timeline Debate
Hoskinson pointed developers toward DARPA’s Quantum Benchmarking Initiative as a neutral reference. The program evaluates whether quantum systems can outperform classical computers on meaningful tasks.
Notably, DARPA avoids vendor claims and focuses on measurable results. According to DARPA, 2033 serves as a target year to assess utility-scale quantum computing. Hoskinson said that date provides a clearer horizon for planning upgrades.
Until then, performance trade-offs deserve careful scrutiny. He warned against relying on corporate roadmaps or marketing forecasts. Instead, he described DARPA’s work as the most objective benchmark available.
That approach, he said, helps separate hype from realistic risk. Meanwhile, most major blockchains still rely on elliptic-curve cryptography. Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana and Cardano all use it for transaction security.
If powerful quantum computers emerge, Shor’s algorithm could theoretically break those systems. However, Hoskinson emphasized that the industry already knows how to respond. The real decision, he said, involves choosing when and how to transition, not whether solutions exist.
Related: Cardano Founder Blames Institutional Schemes for Crypto Crash
Hashes, Lattices, and Cardano’s Phased Strategy
Hoskinson outlined two primary post-quantum approaches. Hash-based cryptography, favored by Ethereum, relies on secure hash functions for digital signatures. These systems remain simple and well-studied but mainly support signing, not encryption.
By contrast, Cardano is exploring lattice-based cryptography. Lattices support signatures, encryption, and advanced cryptographic tools. Hoskinson noted they can run efficiently on existing graphics processors.
He added that lattice systems could reuse AI-focused hardware already deployed worldwide. As a result, networks might avoid building specialized chips to handle new cryptography. That compatibility, he said, lowers long-term transition barriers.
Still, Hoskinson did not advocate immediate protocol-wide changes. Instead, he described a staged mitigation approach. One option involves post-quantum-signed checkpoints of blockchain history.
Cardano could use systems like Mithril and its Midnight sidechain for such notarizations. These checkpoints would protect historical data without altering daily transaction processing. However, Hoskinson warned that every design choice carries trade-offs.
He said networks must weigh finality models, performance limits, and long-term flexibility. Once adopted, those choices remain difficult to reverse. Therefore, careful sequencing matters as much as technical strength.
Meanwhile, Hoskinson framed the quantum debate around timing rather than urgency. NIST standards confirm readiness, while DARPA’s 2033 benchmark defines the threat horizon. Until hardware efficiency improves, blockchains face measured choices, not immediate overhaul pressure.
