The post Buterin Outlines Ethereum’s Quantum Resistance Roadmap appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has proposed a plan to The post Buterin Outlines Ethereum’s Quantum Resistance Roadmap appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has proposed a plan to

Buterin Outlines Ethereum’s Quantum Resistance Roadmap

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has proposed a plan to address four areas of the network he sees as most vulnerable to quantum attacks.

Quantum computing and crypto have been in the headlines recently as concerns mount over Bitcoin and other blockchains’ resistance to quantum-capable supercomputers.

Buterin posted his quantum resistance roadmap for Ethereum on Thursday, stating that the four areas are: validator signatures, data storage, user account signatures, and zero-knowledge proofs.

He said that replacing the current BLS (Boneh-Lynn-Shacham) consensus signatures with “Lean” quantum-safe hash-based signatures would fix that component. The challenge is selecting an appropriate hash function, since the choice would likely remain in place long-term.

“This may be ‘Ethereum’s last hash function,’ so it’s important to choose wisely,” he said. 

Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake proposed “Lean Ethereum,” a plan to make the network quantum-secure, in August 2025. 

Quantum-safe data storage and accounts  

Regarding data storage, or “blobs”, Ethereum currently uses a system called KZG (Kate-Zaverucha-Goldberg) for storing and verifying data. 

The plan is to swap this out for STARKs (Zero-Knowledge Scalable Transparent Argument of Knowledge), which are quantum-resistant. “It’s manageable, but there’s a lot of engineering work to do,” said Buterin.

Related: Buterin outlines 4-year roadmap to speed up and quantum-proof Ethereum

The third challenge is user accounts. Ethereum currently uses ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm) signatures, which are standard cryptographic keys. The fix is to upgrade the network so that accounts can use any signature scheme, including “lattice-based” quantum-resistant ones.

However, quantum-safe signatures are significantly more computationally intensive and would consume more gas.

“The long-term fix is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation, which could reduce these gas overheads to near-zero,” he said. 

Quantum-resistant proofs are very expensive 

Quantum-resistant proofs are extremely expensive to run onchain so “the solution again is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation,” said Buterin.

Instead of verifying every signature and proof individually onchain, a single master proof or “validation frame” would verify thousands of them at once, keeping costs near zero.

“This way, a block could ‘contain’ a thousand validation frames, each of which contains either a 3kB signature or even a 256kB proof,” he explained. 

Buterin floated the concept of a recursive-STARK-based bandwidth-efficient mempool in January. Source: ETHresearch

Buterin also commented on the Ethereum Foundation’s “Strawmap” on Thursday, stating that he expects to see “progressive decreases of both slot time and finality time.” 

Magazine: Bitcoin may take 7 years to upgrade to post-quantum: BIP-360 co-author

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy

Source: https://cointelegraph.com/news/vitalik-proposes-4-fixes-quantum-resistance-roadmap-for-ethereum?utm_source=rss_feed&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=rss_partner_inbound

Market Opportunity
QUANTUM Logo
QUANTUM Price(QUANTUM)
$0.002814
$0.002814$0.002814
-1.12%
USD
QUANTUM (QUANTUM) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.