There's a difference between saying "we use post-quantum cryptography" and showing exactly where it lives 📍
For NaoX today:
✅ Transaction signing: ML-DSA-87
✅ Native signature verification
✅ Post-quantum wallet key derivation
✅ Validator admission at 2,592-byte keys
✅ Hybrid migration support
⚠️ Finality aggregation: classical BLS
That last line is the one that matters.
No mature post-quantum aggregation scheme currently gives proof-of-stake systems the compactness BLS provides. Claiming otherwise would make the marketing stronger and the engineering weaker.
Post-quantum security should be measured layer by layer, not acronym by acronym.
For NaoX today:
✅ Transaction signing: ML-DSA-87
✅ Native signature verification
✅ Post-quantum wallet key derivation
✅ Validator admission at 2,592-byte keys
✅ Hybrid migration support
⚠️ Finality aggregation: classical BLS
That last line is the one that matters.
No mature post-quantum aggregation scheme currently gives proof-of-stake systems the compactness BLS provides. Claiming otherwise would make the marketing stronger and the engineering weaker.
Post-quantum security should be measured layer by layer, not acronym by acronym.
