Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson challenged Vitalik Buterin's warnings that artificial intelligence could undermine the security of cryptocurrencies, arguing that existing security standards have taken into account decades of research on mathematical attacks.

Hoskinson refuted Buterin's claims regarding AI threatening quantum-resistant cryptographic systems. Buterin had previously warned that advancements in artificial intelligence could uncover mathematical weaknesses in the currently trusted lattice-based cryptography.

Cardano Founder Questions Vitalik's AI Security Warnings

This debate began when Buterin warned that the rapid progress of AI in auxiliary mathematics could challenge the assumptions underlying the currently considered secure cryptographic systems.

He specifically pointed out that lattice-based cryptography is a concerning field, suggesting that increasingly powerful AI systems may discover more efficient methods to solve the mathematical problems used to protect digital information.

In his view, the progress in automated mathematical research could compress decades of discoveries into a much shorter period of time. This advancement may force developers to re-examine the security of existing algorithms.

Buterin compares this potential development with the progress in the field of integer factorization, stating that researchers have discovered methods that make certain calculations much easier than previously estimated.

This co-founder, Ethereum, believes that similar breakthroughs could also occur in the security based on lattice technology, making some of the current parameter choices no longer sufficient.

Hoskinson rejected this analogy, arguing that the history of integer factorization does not prove that the lattice system has weaknesses to the same extent.

Hoskinson writes, 'Decomposing analogies is incorrect.' He explains that improvements in integer decomposition rely on specific mathematical techniques, which have not been verified in the lattice problems used in modern cryptography.

The founder, Cardano, mentioned research that can be traced back to the introduction of the Lenstra – Lenstra – Lov – sz reduction algorithm in 1982. He also cited subsequent improvements in lattice screening methods and other attack techniques as examples of decades of testing.

Hoskinson indicates that the security parameters used in modern lattice-based algorithms have taken into account the known advancements in these technologies.

His response came after Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake raised concerns on October 7th regarding AI auxiliary attacks on cryptocurrency wallets. Drake warned that powerful AI systems might eventually detect attacks targeting elliptic curve cryptography used for authorizing blockchain transactions. Buterin advocates taking these possibilities seriously, but does not encourage users to rush to transfer their funds to new wallets.

Hoskinson Defends Cryptography Used in Security Standards

The core part of the argument Hoskinson involves ML-KEM and ML-DSA; these two cryptographic systems have been standardized by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the United States.

ML-KEM allows all parties to establish shared cryptographic secrets, while ML-DSA provides digital signatures for authentication information and verification of authorization.

In August 2024, NIST approved these two systems in accordance with FIPS 203 and FIPS 204, following years of research and public evaluation. The institution also standardized SLH-DSA separately in accordance with FIPS 205; SLH-DSA is a hash-based digital signature system.

Hoskinson believes that ML-KEM and ML-DSA were selected after researchers examined different methods for attacking lattice-based mathematical problems.

He insists that the existence of a mathematical structure does not automatically imply that a certain algorithm is insecure, especially when the security parameters are chosen based on established attack costs.

Buterin once suggested that in the future, the progress of AI might be sufficient to justify a significant increase in the size based on lattice keys, with the increase potentially reaching up to 10 times.

Hoskinson rejected this proposal, calling it "digital divination," as it was not supported by any specific algorithm or calculation.

The founder, Cardano, stated that simply increasing the key length without identifying the corresponding attack is not a reliable method to measure security.

He believes that researchers should first determine the computational cost of a new attack before deciding whether existing password parameters need to be adjusted.

NIST currently describes ML-KEM and ML-DSA as algorithms that are believed to be capable of resisting attacks from sufficiently powerful quantum computers. However, the relevant standards do not assert that these systems are immune to all possible mathematical discoveries.

Ethereum Hash-based security plan questioned

The concerns of Buterin are related to the cryptographic system work being advanced by Ethereum to defend against future quantum computing attacks.

The Lean Ethereum research in this network is increasingly leaning towards the use of hash-based signatures in scenarios that developers can utilize, including constructions based on WOTS and SPHINCS.

Buterin believes that hash-based methods may provide stronger long-term security, as they do not rely on the same mathematical assumptions as lattice-based systems.

However, Hoskinson questions the claim that "hash functions are inherently more secure," as hash functions are designed with fewer structures and lower usability.

He mentioned the historical vulnerabilities of MD5 and SHA-1. Both of these hash algorithms have been successfully attacked by researchers taking advantage of their internal design flaws.

Hoskinson indicates that even for SHA-256, there is no mathematical proof that can ensure it is immune to all possible attacks.

“Its security lies in the fact that no one has yet managed to crack it,” he wrote, and believed that the same standard of scrutiny should apply to all families of cryptographers.

He also questioned the previous research by Ethereum on Poseidon and Poseidon2, stating that these two hash functions are designed for the efficient use in certain blockchain proof-of-work systems.

Ethereum Researchers have gradually abandoned Poseidon in their Layer roadmap, turning to more mature alternative solutions such as SHA-2 and BLAKE2s.

In August this year, Researcher Ethereum Foundation Justin Drake explained that improvements to the binary domain proof system have made traditional hashing more practical in future network designs.

Hoskinson believes that hash-based signatures are still useful in those limited contexts where they are acceptable, but they cannot replace all the functions performed by public key cryptography.

This debate also extends to the encryption systems used in secure communications, websites, and other applications that require protected communication.

AI The cryptography debate extends to the security of blockchain wallets

At the time of the confrontation between the two founders, blockchain developers were pondering how to protect digital assets from the impacts of future AI and advancements in quantum computing.

Buterin It is recommended that users consider storing their cryptocurrencies in addresses whose public keys have not been exposed due to outgoing transactions, provided that they can do so securely.

He emphasized that this recommendation does not mean that users should rush to migrate their wallets, as doing so could also pose security risks.

The founder of Ethereum supports the plan to enable Ethereum to withstand quantum attacks, which includes modifications to transaction signatures, consensus mechanisms, and zero-knowledge proof systems.

Hoskinson insists that research based on lattice methods should continue, while at the same time promoting alternative solutions based on hashing.

This debate has now extended to companies that host systems developed by development institutions. In May of this year, BitGo used ML-DSA technology, which was co-developed with Silence Laboratories, to test quantum-resistant wallet signatures.

This demonstration tested whether post-quantum signatures can operate within the existing institutional wallet processes. This was a controlled test, and it does not imply that the current wallet cryptography has been compromised.

Other blockchain networks are also advancing similar protections. The post-quantum security roadmap for Sui includes lattice-based and hash-based signature options for future-oriented account authentication.

In his response on October 9th, Hoskinson did not announce any new Cardano cryptography upgrades or deployment timelines. He called for any newly discovered attacks to be tested, cost-analyzed, and reviewed before developers modify security parameters or abandon existing algorithms.