Skip to content

BIP-XXX: Hybrid SPHINCS+ / secp256k1 Key Derivation for Quantum-Resistant Bitcoin Wallets#2176

Closed
DigiMancer3D wants to merge 1 commit into
bitcoin:masterfrom
DigiMancer3D:master
Closed

BIP-XXX: Hybrid SPHINCS+ / secp256k1 Key Derivation for Quantum-Resistant Bitcoin Wallets#2176
DigiMancer3D wants to merge 1 commit into
bitcoin:masterfrom
DigiMancer3D:master

Conversation

@DigiMancer3D
Copy link
Copy Markdown

This proposes a new wallet-layer BIP for a practical hybrid post-quantum key derivation scheme.

Reference implementation:
https://github.com/DigiMancer3D/bip-xxx-sphincs-hybrid

The BIP and code have been written to be immediately usable by wallet developers and advanced users building quantum-resistant paper wallets / cold storage today. It requires no consensus changes and works with existing tools (Electrum, bitaddress.org, Taproot, etc.).

Awaiting BIP editor assignment of a real number (replacing XXX).

This BIP defines a hybrid post-quantum key derivation scheme using SPHINCS+ and HE-SD for Bitcoin wallets, ensuring compatibility with existing tools and low-resource hardware.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@jonatack jonatack left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@DigiMancer3D Thank you for your proposal, but if I am not mistaken it appears to have been opened here prematurely before submission and discussion on the mail list? Happy to re-open if that is incorrect. See the README and BIP 3 for the process (thanks!)

@DigiMancer3D
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

DigiMancer3D commented May 26, 2026

I was unaware the process had changed. Thanks for the information.

After looking at the readme given.Sent the email

@murchandamus
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This proposal makes no sense.
It doesn’t matter how you generate the private keys, if you continue using the same output scheme: once the public key is revealed the mythical CRQC could calculate the private key from it. Without a consensus change you cannot introduce a new output type, and all currently existing output types are not safe against shortrange attack.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants