mirror of
https://github.com/lux-apps/papers.git
synced 2026-11-03 05:07:46 +00:00
zeekay
dd93cb41f7
Sweep across the non-Tier-1 paper catalogue (Tier-1 owned by parallel
agent and excluded). All 113 processed papers already had luxcover
wired up; this commit fixes 14 build breakers and produces fresh
PDFs across the catalogue.
Fixes:
- lux-blockchain-scaling-laws: em-dash inside lstlisting -> --
- lux-corona-pq: stale \input pointing at 03-the-corona-scheme renamed
to 03-the-corona-scheme (file already renamed on disk)
- lux-lattice-cryptography-primer: same Corona->Corona rename
- lux-formal-verification-lean4: Lean source uses unicode (×, ∀, ∃, ∈,
∧, ∨, ∩, ≠, ⟨, ⟩, ·, ¬) inside lstlistings. Added a literate map
so listings render the math glyphs without UTF-8 fault.
- lux-id-did-specification: ✓/✗ in tabular replaced with \ding{51}
/ \ding{55} (pifont). Added pifont package.
- lux-ntt-simd-implementation: middle-dot in Go assembly listings;
added literate {·}{\textperiodcentered}.
- lux-ntt-transform: μ, ×, –, — in regular text (no T1 fontenc).
Replaced with $\mu$/$\times$/--/--- via unicode->latex sweep.
- lux-perpetuals-derivatives, lux-quantum-consensus,
lux-quasar-consensus, lux-tee-computing-mesh: same unicode->latex
sweep across body text. Also fixed broken math segment
`$L_{avg} = 10$\times$$` -> `$L_{avg} = 10\times$`.
- lux-zchain: emoji glyphs in roadmap table replaced with
parenthetical text.
- lux-triple-proof-consensus: dropped duplicate \usepackage{geometry}
that clashed with luxcover (geometry option clash).
- pq: defined missing \Rq macro.
PDFs rebuilt for the full Tier-2/3 set.
Excluded (Tier-1, parallel agent): lp-073-pulsar, lp-stricte2epq,
dag-evm-formal, lp-010-quasar-stm-{3,4}, lp-020-quasar-consensus,
lux-institutional-custody, lux-nist-mptc-submission, pqsafe-il5,
pq-rns, plus shared/ and lps/.
76 lines
2.8 KiB
TeX
76 lines
2.8 KiB
TeX
\documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{article}
|
|
\usepackage{../shared/luxcover}
|
|
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
|
|
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
|
|
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amsthm}
|
|
\usepackage{graphicx}
|
|
\usepackage{hyperref}
|
|
\usepackage{algorithm}
|
|
\usepackage{algpseudocode}
|
|
\usepackage{xcolor}
|
|
\usepackage{booktabs}
|
|
\usepackage{enumitem}
|
|
\usepackage{tikz}
|
|
\usepackage{tabularx}
|
|
|
|
\hypersetup{colorlinks=true,linkcolor=black,citecolor=blue,urlcolor=blue}
|
|
|
|
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
|
|
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
|
|
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
|
|
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
|
|
\newtheorem{definition}{Definition}[section]
|
|
\newtheorem{remark}{Remark}[section]
|
|
|
|
\title{\textbf{Quantum Threat Model\\for Blockchain Infrastructure}}
|
|
|
|
\author{
|
|
Zach Kelling \\
|
|
\textit{Lux Industries, Inc.}\\
|
|
\texttt{[email protected]}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
\date{Original: 2023\quad|\quad Revised: February 2026}
|
|
|
|
\begin{document}
|
|
|
|
\luxcoverpage
|
|
|
|
\begin{abstract}
|
|
We present a systematic threat model for quantum computing attacks against blockchain
|
|
infrastructure. Unlike prior analyses that focus narrowly on signature forgery, we
|
|
enumerate the full attack surface: mempool public key exposure, validator signature
|
|
forgery, retroactive chain compromise via historical transaction replay, bridge key
|
|
extraction, and oracle manipulation through forged attestations. We provide timeline
|
|
estimates for cryptographically relevant quantum computers (CRQCs) based on published
|
|
hardware roadmaps from IBM, Google, and PsiQuantum, concluding that a $>$50\%
|
|
probability of CRQC existence before 2035 mandates immediate defensive action.
|
|
We perform an economic analysis showing that the cost of hybrid post-quantum deployment
|
|
(approximately 15\% throughput overhead and 1.2\,KB additional signature data per epoch)
|
|
is negligible compared to the expected loss from a successful quantum attack on a major
|
|
blockchain (total value at risk exceeding \$500\,billion across all chains). The
|
|
rational strategy is immediate hybrid deployment, not wait-and-see. We conclude with
|
|
concrete recommendations for blockchain protocol designers.
|
|
|
|
\textbf{Keywords}: quantum computing, blockchain security, Shor's algorithm,
|
|
Grover's algorithm, post-quantum migration, threat model
|
|
\end{abstract}
|
|
|
|
\tableofcontents
|
|
\newpage
|
|
|
|
%% ========================================================================
|
|
%% 1. INTRODUCTION
|
|
%% ========================================================================
|
|
|
|
\input{sections/01-introduction}
|
|
\input{sections/02-shor-s-algorithm-impact-on-blockchain-pr}
|
|
\input{sections/03-grover-s-algorithm-hash-function-impact}
|
|
\input{sections/04-blockchain-specific-attack-vectors}
|
|
\input{sections/05-timeline-estimates-for-cryptographically}
|
|
\input{sections/06-economic-analysis}
|
|
\input{sections/07-recommendations}
|
|
\input{sections/99-conclusion}
|
|
|
|
\end{document}
|