{"id":31536,"date":"2026-08-14T18:37:40","date_gmt":"2026-08-14T17:37:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/investx.fr\/en\/2026\/08\/14\/adam-back-ethereum-post-quantum-cryptography\/"},"modified":"2026-08-14T18:37:47","modified_gmt":"2026-08-14T17:37:47","slug":"adam-back-ethereum-post-quantum-cryptography","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/investx.fr\/en\/crypto-news\/adam-back-ethereum-post-quantum-cryptography\/","title":{"rendered":"Adam Back Endorses Ethereum’s Post-Quantum Shift: A Massive Cryptographic Revolution"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Adam Back<\/strong>, one of the most respected figures in Bitcoin<\/strong>‘s history, has just publicly thrown his weight behind a major Ethereum<\/strong> decision. It’s a powerful signal that has not gone unnoticed across the crypto community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ethereum<\/strong> is dropping its custom Poseidon<\/strong> hash functions in favor of battle-tested cryptographic standards \u2014 a transition directly tied to the quantum threat<\/strong>. And when Back approves, the crypto world listens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Behind this technical shift lies a fundamental question: the long-term resilience of blockchains<\/strong> against quantum computers<\/strong>. Here is why this decision could redefine security standards across the entire industry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why Adam Back, Inventor of Hashcash, Carries So Much Weight in This Debate<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Adam Back<\/strong> is no ordinary commentator. Inventor of Hashcash in 1997<\/strong> \u2014 the proof-of-work<\/a><\/strong> mechanism that directly inspired Bitcoin<\/strong>‘s mining system \u2014 he is one of the very few individuals cited in Satoshi Nakamoto<\/strong>‘s original whitepaper. Today, as CEO of Blockstream<\/strong>, he remains an absolute authority on cryptography<\/strong> as applied to decentralized systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

His endorsement of Ethereum<\/strong>‘s cryptographic pivot is therefore far from trivial. Back<\/strong> has publicly praised the Ethereum<\/strong> community’s decision to abandon Poseidon<\/strong> hash functions \u2014 originally designed to optimize zero-knowledge proofs (ZK-proofs)<\/strong> \u2014 in favor of standardized cryptographic primitives<\/strong> that carry a far stronger audit track record. For a cypherpunk of his caliber, cryptographic robustness will always take precedence over short-term optimization.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This kind of cross-community support is rare. In an ecosystem where Bitcoin<\/a><\/strong> and Ethereum<\/strong> frequently clash over philosophy and design choices, seeing such an iconic figure from the Bitcoin<\/strong> camp validate a technical decision made by Ethereum<\/strong> is a genuine sign of maturity for the industry as a whole.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Poseidon Dropped: Understanding Ethereum’s Cryptographic Pivot<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Poseidon<\/strong> hash functions had been adopted by Ethereum<\/strong> for their efficiency within ZK<\/strong> circuits \u2014 they allowed cryptographic proofs to be generated faster and at lower cost. But their relative novelty and purpose-built design posed a fundamental problem: an insufficient audit history<\/strong> when faced with adversaries wielding quantum computing power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The decision to migrate toward proven cryptographic standards<\/strong> \u2014 validated through years of academic research and independent audits \u2014 is rooted in a long-term security<\/strong> mindset. Quantum computers<\/strong>, while still far from posing an immediate operational threat, are advancing at a pace that forces protocols to start preparing now. The NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology)<\/strong> finalized its first post-quantum cryptography standards<\/strong> in 2024, accelerating awareness across the industry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Ethereum<\/strong>, this change comes with trade-offs: ZK<\/strong> proofs could temporarily become more expensive to generate. But the community has clearly chosen resilience<\/strong> over performance \u2014 a trade-off that Back<\/strong>, as a seasoned cryptographer, evidently considers the right call.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Quantum Threat: A Systemic Risk Crypto Can No Longer Ignore<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The post-quantum<\/strong> question is no longer theoretical. Google, IBM, and several state-level actors<\/strong> are investing heavily in the development of quantum computers<\/strong> capable, in time, of breaking the encryption algorithms<\/strong> currently in use \u2014 most notably the elliptic curves<\/a><\/strong> that both Bitcoin<\/strong> and Ethereum<\/strong> rely on to secure transaction signatures<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A sufficiently powerful quantum computer<\/strong> could theoretically derive a private key<\/strong> from an exposed public key<\/strong>, putting billions of dollars in assets at risk. Reused addresses and funds that have sat dormant for years would be particularly vulnerable. This is precisely why Ethereum<\/strong>‘s migration toward post-quantum primitives<\/a><\/strong> is being viewed as a strategic decision rather than a routine technical adjustment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fact that a figure like Adam Back<\/strong> \u2014 whose credibility is built on decades of rigorous cryptographic work \u2014 publicly validates this direction sends a clear message to the entire industry: quantum resistance is no longer optional, it is a necessity<\/strong>. Other protocols, including Bitcoin<\/strong> itself, will sooner or later need to engage in a similar reckoning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Related articles :<\/h3>\n\n\n\n