MJ

A few people yesterday asked how AI could impact FHE / @zama, so here is a quick tldr: 1. There is no evidence that lattices / FHE can be broken by AI, SI or quantum. If anything, there is a growing consensus that fully breaking lattices might imply P = NP. 2. However, it's almost certain that better attacks will be discovered, which would require increasing parameter size and taking a short-term hit on performance. The Zama protocol is modular, so we can increase parameters size or swap out any component quickly, without changing the UX or rotating user keys. 3. Zama uses FHE only for privacy, so breaking FHE would not allow stealing funds that are shielded, it would only allow seeing balances and amounts. This is unlike ZK, where breaking the cryptography means you can steal funds and mint infinite tokens. 4. We do a lot of work on cryptanalysis and improving the security of FHE. We spend millions a year on audits (AI and human), research grants, bounties, have 30 PhDs in the team, etc. We have a plan A (the current thing we do), but also a plan B and a plan C if things go wrong. Whatever the future throws at us, we will have a way to adapt to offer the same service. 5. Hashes have been broken in the past, many times (MD5, SHA1, etc), so saying they are more secure than lattices, which have been extensively studied for decades is a stretch to say the least. Not saying its impossible, but history is on the side of lattices here. Lets also remember that if indeed lattices and elliptic curves are broken and there is no public-key encryption anymore, then hiding your balances onchain is the least of your worries, because the world as we know it would be over: no private communications, no online banking, your AI prompts would be public, etc.

We acquired TokenOps a few months back to enable confidential vesting and distribution. We rebuilt it from the ground up to he confidential by design. If you are launching a token, doing an airdrop, or distributing RWAs, get in touch!