Advanced Quantum-Secure Blockchain Solutions for AI-Powered Financial Transactions
Main Article Content
Abstract
Blockchain-based financial platforms depend on elliptic-curve digital signatures that a sufficiently large quantum computer could break, while AI-driven fraud screening adds a second layer of processing to every transaction. This paper presents a quantum-secure blockchain architecture for AI-powered financial transactions. It combines post-quantum and hybrid digital signatures, a lattice-based key-encapsulation channel, a Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus layer, and a gradient-boosted fraud-detection module at the transaction gateway. We benchmarked four signature configurations (ECDSA, Falcon-512, ML-DSA-44, and a hybrid ECDSA plus ML-DSA-44 scheme) on a 16-validator permissioned network and evaluated four fraud models on 1,200,000 anonymized card-not-present transactions. The hybrid configuration sustained 4,070 transactions per second (TPS), 16.3% below the ECDSA baseline of 4,860 TPS, with a median confirmation latency of 396 ms. Transaction size grew from 314 to 2,734 bytes. The XGBoost screening module reached an F1-score of 0.893 and an AUC of 0.985 at 0.38 ms mean inference time per transaction. The results show that quantum-resistant protection can be added to AI-enabled financial ledgers at a moderate and predictable cost.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The license allows re-users to share and adapt the work, as long as credit is given to the author and don't use it for commercial purposes.
References
S. Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system,” 2008.
P. W. Shor, “Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer,” SIAM Journal on Computing, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 1484–1509, 1997.
L. K. Grover, “A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search,” in Proc. 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), 1996, pp. 212–219.
D. Aggarwal, G. Brennen, T. Lee, M. Santha, and M. Tomamichel, “Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them,” Ledger, vol. 3, pp. 68–90, 2018.
A. K. Fedorov, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. I. Lvovsky, “Quantum computers put blockchain security at risk,” Nature, vol. 563, pp. 465–467, 2018.
E. O. Kiktenko et al., “Quantum-secured blockchain,” Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 3, no. 3, art. 035004, 2018.
J. J. Kearney and C. A. Perez-Delgado, “Vulnerability of blockchain technologies to quantum attacks,” Array, vol. 10, art. 100065, 2021.
C. Gidney and M. Ekerå, “How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits,” Quantum, vol. 5, art. 433, 2021.
M. Mosca, “Cybersecurity in an era with quantum computers: Will we be ready?,” IEEE Security & Privacy, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 38–41, 2018.
D. J. Bernstein and T. Lange, “Post-quantum cryptography,” Nature, vol. 549, no. 7671, pp. 188–194, 2017.
L. Ducas et al., “CRYSTALS-Dilithium: A lattice-based digital signature scheme,” IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems, vol. 2018, no. 1, pp. 238–268, 2018.
J. Bos et al., “CRYSTALS-Kyber: A CCA-secure module-lattice-based KEM,” in Proc. IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2018, pp. 353–367.
National Institute of Standards and Technology, “Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Standard,” FIPS 204, Aug. 2024.
M. Castro and B. Liskov, “Practical Byzantine fault tolerance,” in Proc. 3rd Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI), 1999, pp. 173–186.
G. Alagic et al., “Status report on the third round of the NIST post-quantum cryptography standardization process,” NISTIR 8413, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2022.
