Hey Magicians,
With recent warnings like Vitalik’s estimate of a 20% chance that quantum computers could break ECDSA by 2030, Ethereum faces a growing threat to legacy wallets via “harvest now, decrypt later” attacks from advanced actors (e.g., state programs). This exacerbates the already $3.4B+ in lost ETH from user errors like seed phrase losses, highlighting a systemic issue for early adopters who built the network.
All viable responses challenge our ethos of immutability and sovereignty:
- Do Nothing: Risks mass theft of inactive funds, eroding trust and abandoning pioneers (as noted in Deloitte’s quantum risk assessments).
- Forced Migration: As implied in the Lean Ethereum vision (replacing BLS/KZG with hash-based alternatives over the next decade), this could secure the protocol but mandate upgrades, potentially leading to funds loss during “recovery forks” (per Vitalik) and fracturing the community like past debates.
- Decentralized Recovery Process: A generalized, opt-in EIP for verifiable claims on lost funds (e.g., via smart contracts for tx history/associated accounts evidence, with validator consensus in 6-12 month batches). Builds on ERC-4337 abstraction for social recovery and stagnant concepts like ERC-1080 recoverable tokens, without retroactive state changes—funds transfer on-chain post-verification, preserving immutability.
Why This? It empowers users scalably (not targeted like EIP-999), mitigates quantum fallout proactively, and aligns with post-Pectra roadmaps for better UX. Risks (abuse, complexity) can be mitigated via zk-proofs, audits, and legacy sunsetting.
This isn’t about one user—it’s ecosystem-wide.
Thoughts?