GOING LIVE IN 20 MINUTES We’re joining @ourcryptotalk to talk about what we’ve been building at Neptune. Tune in and catch up with the team. xitter.cf/i/spaces/1DGleVgrqWVJL

Join us for Talk With Builders Episode 5 ft. @NeptunePrivacy Live Space on privacy-first L1 and post-quantum tech. Set your reminder 👇 xitter.cf/i/spaces/1DGleVgrqWVJL

Vitalik just ranked the math. Hash-based beats lattice-based. Here's what 13 quantum resistant tokens actually run on 👇 Hash-based, live → $QRL : XMSS since 2018 → $XNT : STARK hash lock since genesis → $CKB : SPHINCS+, opt-in Lattice-based, live → $ABEL : lattice ring signatures, mandatory → $CELL : Dilithium by default → $QTC : ML-DSA only, mainnet Sep 2026 → $ALGO : Falcon-1024, opt-in → $NEAR : ML-DSA-65, opt-in Not live yet → $STRK : ECDSA accounts, Falcon planned → $NAORIS : Dilithium L1, ERC-20 token → $QANX : Dilithium testnet, ERC-20 token → $ZEC : scheme unpicked, 2027 target → $QUBIC : SchnorrQ, no PQ plan Only 3 of the 13 are live on the math he trusts.

I don't recommend anyone scramble to move their funds to new wallets today. But we should take the risks to cryptography from AI-accelerated math seriously, and minimize our exposure to not just quantum-vulnerable cryptography, but also potentially AI-vulnerable cryptography. The core new area of risk from this viewpoint is, unfortunately, ML-DSA / FHE / lattices. (and it's also another reason, along with quantum, why ECDSA might fall even faster than expected, hence the "fresh address" recommendation) So far most people have been in the mode of thinking "elliptic curves broken, hashes safe, lattices safe". But there is a good chance that the concrete security of lattices will take serious hits from the next two years of AI math. The basic threat model is: factoring is something that naively takes 2^(n/2) time, but over decades smart people have found and optimized number field sieves, and degraded that to 2^O(n^(1/3)), which is why RSA keys and signatures need to be ~400 bytes (and not 64 bytes). What if there are skeletons in the closet like that, both for elliptic curves and lattices, that we are simply not smart enough to discover - but bots soon will be? This is a major part of the reason why for the past year ethereum's lean roadmap has been going in the "hash-only" direction: no lattices, no ML-DSA, no Falcon, no lattice-based commitments inside ZK proofs, etc. Signatures in lean ethereum are all hash-based, either WOTS or SPHINCS-. For signatures and proofs, we already know how to go hash-only. The bigger challenge is for *public-key encryption* - and this goes far beyond blockchains. Secure communication, anonymizing protocols, lots of things need public-key encryption. And unfortunately there are long-standing mathematical theorems showing why public-key encryption cannot be done with hashes alone. You have to have some kind of trapdoor object that has at least one form of usable "structure" - either group theory (incl. isogenies) or lattices or code-based or potentially in the future even more newfangled and spooky things (local mixing?). But for anything that has structure, you should assume that AI will make at least some progress in breaking that structure. Here, one reasonable inference is that if you want to make something plausibly long-term secure, multiply the key sizes by 10. To me that's a very plausible world and something not at all extreme to predict. If AI will bring us 50 years of math in 2 years, then that 50 years of math may very plausibly include a "naive factoring -> GNFS" level of improvement to our ability to break lattices. In that world, lattices will still exist, but they will have to be significantly bigger to guarantee the same level of safety. And at those new larger sizes, hash-based constructions will beat lattice-based constructions on concrete efficiency in every use case where hash-based constructions are possible at all. Theoretically, of course it's possible that hashes are broken too (eg. P = NP would imply that). But I think P = NP is very unlikely. And intuitively, it's much more likely that a mathematical object has exactly no exploitable structure (like hashes are intended to), than that a mathematical object has exactly ~3 forms of exploitable structure (for elliptic curves: associativity, Schoof, pairings) and not some secret fourth form of structure we have not yet discovered that greatly degrades its security (for elliptic curves, ECDLP and pairing security). Similar for LWE, SVP, RLWE and the zoo of lattice problems. For this reason, we do not yet see any reason to worry and start padding the byte size of hashes (if we start to worry more, we would pad the round count first before doing anything to the byte size). Concrete TLDR, my own personal views: * Hash-based > lattice-based, in those situations where hash-based is possible at all * For anything lattice-based, be much more paranoid on param sizes. Remember that blockchains are only a small portion of the cryptography story; this point goes far beyond blockchains and applies to eg. access to websites, secure messaging, Tor / VPNs ... * For privacy protocols, strongly favor NOT putting encrypted notes onchain. Instead, send them offchain through some third-party mechanism. * If it's not difficult for you, keeping your funds in addresses which have not yet been used to make a transaction is a good idea. If it's easy for you, do it. **But be careful about migrations; I personally have lost more money in botched migrations than I have lost in all hacks combined**. * For multisig wallets, doing confirmations offchain is better than onchain, because this way the signatures of signer wallets do not get exposed to the public, so if ECDSA falls to AI much faster than expected, at least the multisig "gracefully degrades" to a 1-of-1 where the 1 is whoever was gathering the signatures - a much better place to be than "anyone can take the money" firefly.social/post/x/210783…

$XNT belongs in this conversation. Public testnet is live for @NeptunePrivacy’s Leviathan, bringing together a private Layer 1, a post-quantum DEX and private AI inside attested TEEs. Check it out! neptune-privacy.gitbook.io/l…

3. A Miden-based execution layer: this is what turns Neptune from “just a private coin” into a place where developers can actually build things. it gives builders a zero-knowledge virtual machine to create private smart contracts, exchanges and apps, without needing to be cryptography experts themselves.

IN FOUR MONTHS, THE NSA STOPS BUYING ANYTHING THAT RUNS ON TODAY'S ENCRYPTION. THE REASON IS QUANTUM COMPUTERS. This is not a proposal, but a published directive with a date. It's called CNSA 2.0, the NSA issued it in 2022, tightened it in 2025, and almost nobody outside the agency has read it. It quietly orders every national security system in America to abandon the encryption the entire internet runs on, because a large enough quantum computer breaks all of it, and the NSA has decided that machine is coming. The schedule: January 1, 2027: every new system the government buys for classified or sensitive work must use quantum resistant encryption. 2030: all network equipment and software signing must run quantum resistant only. Legacy gear that can't be upgraded gets ripped out. 2033: operating systems, applications, cloud. Everything. 2035: full quantum resistance across all national security systems. Hard stop. The NSA gave the EARLIEST deadlines to two categories, signed software and network traffic. Their stated reason: those are most exposed to harvest-now-decrypt-later, adversaries recording encrypted data today to crack it once the quantum computer exists. Defense systems take 18 to 36 months to build. Anything designed today ships after the deadline. For much of the government, the planning window already closed. Meanwhile your bank, your hospital, and the app you're reading this on run the exact algorithms the NSA is abandoning. $INFQ $IONQ $QBTS $RGTI

Privacy needs builders. If you’re building an application that requires privacy, post-quantum security, or confidential execution, join the Leviathan Pioneers by reaching out to us in our Telegram community. Leviathan on @NeptunePrivacy provides the foundation to build applications with programmable privacy and post-quantum security. Help shape the future of programmable privacy.