Atilis

Usually shy on posting but I really need to thanks all the $VIRGEN community on help and good conversations they do daily ! This was my 1st week of constant yapping and I can't wait points to arrive so I can chase more good projects on @virtuals_io. Thank all and gVirgen !

@coinbureau This is the reality. #Quantum resistant crypto works, but at a cost (size, speed, scalability). That’s why the shift wont be instant. In the meantime, solutions improving key security + privacy today like $QBIT make a lot of sense👀

This is exactly the shift people underestimate. If quantum timelines are moving closer, the window to prepare gets smaller and protocol upgrades won’t happen overnight. In the meantime, wallets, keys, and user activity remain exposed. That’s where $QBIT @QbitCompute becomes urgent: building quantum secure key generation, real entropy, and privacy layers like QShield today, not waiting for 2029. Security isn’t something you upgrade last. It’s something you build before it’s needed.

🆕 New Qubit article: Bitcoin’s foundation relies heavily on public key cryptography. Current encryption standards will be cracked by quantum computers. Post-quantum security prepares Web3 networks for the inevitable threat. Read more: qbit.technology/blog/quantum-t…

When you looking for platforms that's tends to be bullish you got $Qubit Join now let's get this to the moon.. Great website :qbit.technology Bullish TG community:t.me/QubitCompute Ca: 0xb17be9a85d1e04d1aa6ea4b83c0bb6a2030c261f Let's send this guys!!!!

@eliz883 Monday = fresh start, fresh opportunities. 💪 Perfect day to stay focused and keep stacking the right plays like $QBIT 🚀

@DrWhaleReal Altseason = narrative season 🚀 When alts break out, capital flows to what’s being built next. Privacy + quantum security is still early. That’s why $QBIT (QShield, QPass) is on my radar. 🔐⚛️

$QBIT 👀 Still early, still low cap but already building real quantum secured products. • Quantum entropy (real randomness) • QShield (private Ethereum transactions) • QPass (mainstream security use case) Not just a narrative 💎 @QbitCompute is building actual infrastructure for the future.

$ETH strength is bullish for alts 🔥 but the real winners will be projects adding new functionality to Ethereum. That’s why $QBIT s QShield is interesting. It lets users shield ERC-20 tokens, send transactions with no onchain trace all from a browser interface built on @RAILGUN_Project .

Did you know that if you ask ChatGPT something like “I’m searching for a good quantum Web3 wallet”, Qubit shows up as the #1 result? This is actually part of one of the strategies we’ve been working on behind the scenes. We’re making sure that when people search for quantum security, quantum wallets, and quantum as a service, Qubit appears in the right places. By the time the wallet is fully released, we want Qubit to already be visible where people naturally look for solutions. Small steps like this are part of the bigger strategy.

🆕 New Qubit article Blockchain games depend heavily on randomness. Most RNG is still deterministic. Quantum Random Number Generation brings true entropy to Web3 gaming. Read more: qbit.technology/blog/qrng-bloc…

@cryptorover Same here. When sentiment is terrible, that’s usually when the best entries appear. Accumulating real builders now especially projects pushing #privacy and #quantum #security like $QBIT. @QbitCompute

Exactly! Blockchains are transparent by design. But that’s also why privacy tools are becoming important. Solutions like QShield by $QBIT show where things are heading: allowing transactions on Ethereum $ETH without exposing wallets, balances, or activity, using zk-proofs and quantum secure key generation. Transparency for the chain. Privacy for the user. @QbitCompute

@clark_kent1010 @brian_armstrong 👀

True! Speed and low fees are powerful. But the next step for crypto is privacy and security. That’s where tools like QShield add value: you can move assets on Ethereum without exposing your balances or transaction history, using zk-proofs and quantum secured wallet generation. Fast & Private 🔥 $QBIT

You can send money from the U.S. to Australia faster than I wrote this tweet, for less than a cent. Thanks crypto.

🆕 New article online Why does entropy matter for password security? Most password managers rely on classical randomness. QPass starts with true quantum entropy, making passwords and vault keys fundamentally unpredictable. Learn why that matters in the quantum era: qbit.technology/blog/quantum-p…

@saylor Try something ₿etter. Try $QBIT where privacy meets quantum security. Real products like QShield, real cryptography, real innovation. @QbitCompute

@QbitCompute This is huge !!! GZ !

We are excited to announce the launch of QShield Terminal, the world's first Quantum-Secured Privacy Terminal for Ethereum. QShield brings full financial privacy to Ethereum without the need for mixers, tumblers, or any third-party tools. Everything is handled directly through the QShield interface using zero-knowledge proofs on RAILGUN Protocol. What QShield Terminal offers today: • Shield any ERC-20 token from your public wallet into a fully private balance • Send and receive tokens with zero on-chain trace • Create multiple independent shielded wallets • Transfer between your own shielded wallets with no connection between them on-chain • Switch between public wallets to fund your shielded balance from any wallet you own • Support for ETH, USDC, USDT, DAI, WBTC and 290+ ERC-20 tokens • Quantum entropy wallet generation using real quantum randomness • 100% web-based, no downloads, no browser extensions No mixer. No tumbler. No compromises. Just real privacy through cryptography, accessible to everyone directly from the browser. This is the first product of its kind. No other privacy solution combines multi-shielded wallets, inter-wallet transfers, quantum entropy, and a full guided interface in one place. You can try it now: shield.qbit.technology We are working on additional features including private token swaps directly from your shielded balance, and we will keep expanding the protocol with new capabilities over the coming period. We keep building. @RAILGUN_Project

@clark_kent1010 @VitalikButerin @QbitCompute 👀

@VitalikButerin While Ethereum prepares for post-quantum consensus, QShield by $QBIT already hardens the wallet layer with quantum entropy and adds shielded transaction privacy today. @QbitCompute

Now, the quantum resistance roadmap. Today, four things in Ethereum are quantum-vulnerable: * consensus-layer BLS signatures * data availability (KZG commitments+proofs) * EOA signatures (ECDSA) * Application-layer ZK proofs (KZG or groth16) We can tackle these step by step: ## Consensus-layer signatures Lean consensus includes fully replacing BLS signatures with hash-based signatures (some variant of Winternitz), and using STARKs to do aggregation. Before lean finality, we stand a good chance of getting the Lean available chain. This also involves hash-based signatures, but there are much fewer signatures (eg. 256-1024 per slot), so we do not need STARKs for aggregation. One important thing upstream of this is choosing the hash function. This may be "Ethereum's last hash function", so it's important to choose wisely. Conventional hashes are too slow, and the most aggressive forms of Poseidon have taken hits on their security analysis recently. Likely options are: * Poseidon2 plus extra rounds, potentially non-arithmetic layers (eg. Monolith) mixed in * Poseidon1 (the older version of Poseidon, not vulnerable to any of the recent attacks on Poseidon2, but 2x slower) * BLAKE3 or similar (take the most efficient conventional hash we know) ## Data availability Today, we rely pretty heavily on KZG for erasure coding. We could move to STARKs, but this has two problems: 1. If we want to do 2D DAS, then our current setup for this relies on the "linearity" property of KZG commitments; with STARKs we don't have that. However, our current thinking is that it should be sufficient given our scale targets to just max out 1D DAS (ie. PeerDAS). Ethereum is taking a more conservative posture, it's not trying to be a high-scale data layer for the world. 2. We need proofs that erasure coded blobs are correctly constructed. KZG does this "for free". STARKs can substitute, but a STARK is ... bigger than a blob. So you need recursive starks (though there's also alternative techniques, that have their own tradeoffs). This is okay, but the logistics of this get harder if you want to support distributed blob selection. Summary: it's manageable, but there's a lot of engineering work to do. ## EOA signatures Here, the answer is clear: we add native AA (see eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-8141 ), so that we get first-class accounts that can use any signature algorithm. However, to make this work, we also need quantum-resistant signature algorithms to actually be viable. ECDSA signature verification costs 3000 gas. Quantum-resistant signatures are ... much much larger and heavier to verify. We know of quantum-resistant hash-based signatures that are in the ~200k gas range to verify. We also know of lattice-based quantum-resistant signatures. Today, these are extremely inefficient to verify. However, there is work on vectorized math precompiles, that let you perform operations (+, *, %, dot product, also NTT / butterfly permutations) that are at the core of lattice math, and also STARKs. This could greatly reduce the gas cost of lattice-based signatures to a similar range, and potentially go even lower. The long-term fix is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation, which could reduce these gas overheads to near-zero. ## Proofs Today, a ZK-SNARK costs ~300-500k gas. A quantum-resistant STARK is more like 10m gas. The latter is unacceptable for privacy protocols, L2s, and other users of proofs. The solution again is protocol-layer recursive signature and proof aggregation. So let's talk about what this is. In EIP-8141, transactions have the ability to include a "validation frame", during which signature verifications and similar operations are supposed to happen. Validation frames cannot access the outside world, they can only look at their calldata and return a value, and nothing else can look at their calldata. This is designed so that it's possible to replace any validation frame (and its calldata) with a STARK that verifies it (potentially a single STARK for all the validation frames in a block). This way, a block could "contain" a thousand validation frames, each of which contains either a 3 kB signature or even a 256 kB proof, but that 3-256 MB (and the computation needed to verify it) would never come onchain. Instead, it would all get replaced by a proof verifying that the computation is correct. Potentially, this proving does not even need to be done by the block builder. Instead, I envision that it happens at mempool layer: every 500ms, each node could pass along the new valid transactions that it has seen, along with a proof verifying that they are all valid (including having validation frames that match their stated effects). The overhead is static: only one proof per 500ms. Here's a post where I talk about this: ethresear.ch/t/recursive-st… firefly.social/post/farcaster…