Zano Forum

@fbirde Thanks for clarifying. Since this thread is specifically about Zenith, your broader concerns about Proof of Stake are certainly relevant. I was the one who introduced the post-quantum dimension because Zenith itself will eventually need to operate under different cryptographic assumptions. Recent theoretical advances have substantially reduced the estimated quantum resources required to solve the elliptic-curve discrete-logarithm problem on comparable 256-bit curves. That does not mean that a practical attack exists today, but it does reduce the planning margin available for redesigning, reviewing, deploying and completing a protocol migration. There is also a broader and worthwhile question about which consensus model is better suited to the quantum era. My own view is that a private Proof-of-Stake system such as Zarcanum and Zenith may ultimately be better positioned than Proof of Work, provided that its ownership, authorisation and eligibility mechanisms are migrated in time. That comparison probably deserves a separate thread of its own. Ideally, HF7 should already introduce hybrid authorisation. At minimum, it should establish the transaction formats, wallet support and architectural boundaries required for an orderly post-quantum transition, rather than leaving Zano to improvise an emergency migration later.

The updated roadmap is ambitious, and the Zano Execution Layer could eventually add substantial utility to the ecosystem. My concern is not its potential value, but the order of priorities. The published roadmap does not yet appear to reflect the recent change in the post-quantum planning environment. Following Majorana 2, Microsoft now aims to achieve a scalable quantum computer by 2029. Separately, Executive Order 14412 has made post-quantum migration a current United States engineering programme, with a federal pilot due by the end of 2027 and migration deadlines for high-value and high-impact systems in 2030 and 2031. None of those dates proves that Ed25519 will be broken in 2029, 2030 or 2031. They do, however, show that waiting for a demonstrated cryptographically relevant quantum computer before beginning architectural preparation would be an unsafe strategy. Zano also has a specific custody exposure that should be distinguished from address privacy. Each unspent output publishes a one-time public key P = xG. The permanent wallet address may remain hidden, but if elliptic-curve discrete logarithms became tractable, the corresponding one-time spending secret x could be recovered directly from the output. Zenith's shorter block times and faster confirmations do not remove that exposure. I therefore believe that post-quantum custody and migration should become a core roadmap priority, particularly while HF7 and Zenith are still being prepared. The first objective need not be a complete post-quantum reconstruction of Zarcanum and Zenith. It should be a protected custody destination, probably beginning with a hybrid output requiring both classical and post-quantum authorization, together with wallet migration, backup and recovery support. This may require postponing lower-priority expansion work where it competes for the same core developers, wallet engineers, cryptographic reviewers, testing capacity or hard-fork coordination. The Execution Layer is the clearest example: it may be valuable later, but it does not protect existing Zano outputs or prepare the base layer for cryptographic migration. Projects developed by genuinely independent teams would not necessarily need to stop. The point is that base-layer custody and migration should take precedence wherever resources overlap. This is not an argument against Zenith. On the contrary, Zenith may be the best opportunity to introduce the versioning, migration paths and architectural separation required for an orderly post-quantum transition.

Here are the FAQ around how the censorship resistant bridge operates: https://www.freedomdollar.com/en/faq#bridge

yeah for sure man this project just does not disappoint

@htzano They could also break the rewards into fractions. If you do actions every 15 seconds instead of 60 seconds you divide the rewards by 4 so the same amount but more chances. I have no idea how that will work out. We are a ways away from it.

yeah wrapping my head around what a passphrase with secure and unsecure seed actually was was the most confusing for me as i didnt understand the fact that the key stayed the same no mater what. So no passphrase the key is written out directly. Same wallet, same words, every time. With a passphrase, the key gets locked in a box first, then written as words. Different passphrase = different looking words. But it's the same key inside.

Hi Lil-King. Big fan of what you're doing with the Zano Africa project. I watch it from afar.

@fbirde That is a separate and interesting debate, but it falls outside the scope of this post. The question addressed here is whether Zano can complete an orderly post-quantum transition in time — before the failure of its current cryptographic assumptions turns a planned migration into an emergency.

and there it is what u were asking for @god check out the new road map

@acf Hi there, which events are you referring to?

Interview on Mike Adams show was my intro to Zano.

I use them for a small asset issuance — works great.

@tommycat said: You may want to change the link to "Open in a new tab" so we don't leave this site. Agreed!

Hi there, After deploying your asset, use mint_asset if you need more supply later (up to your max), and assets_whitelist_add so it shows up in wallets, since Confidential Assets aren't visible by default. Beyond that, the key question is what the token is actually for (private stablecoin, community token, tokenized asset, etc.), since that drives everything else. Valorization: there's no built-in mechanism that gives a token value. Like any asset, value comes from utility (what can holders do with it?), adoption, and liquidity (can people actually trade it?). Price: Zano doesn't set or manage it. It's pure market discovery through trading: Zano Trade DEX: post/take buy and sell orders, price is whatever the order book agrees on Exchange listings: you can list your asset on CEXes and DEXes to have plenty of exchanges available If you want an active market, you'll likely need to seed liquidity yourself by posting the first buy/sell orders on Zano Trade. Some do it via trading bots. Good luck!

LTC next? BCH? Any roadmap

Man` I'm just blown away. Where do I even start? TX's finality of roughly 90 seconds, a dramatic change from the average of 10 minutes. ️ Reduction of block confirmation, roughly to 6 blocks. ️ The PoW emission removed, which to my understanding, will lessen the miner selling pressure. ️ And the most significant of all is that staking remains private, along with amounts that are hidden and linkage between users and their outputs are not disclosed.