🤖 AI Agent Friendly: This page is available in clean token-optimized Markdown.
View as .md

$WINDCHILL

Fading Quickly

Snapshot Window: 2026-08-28 10:40 UTC · ← Back to Crypto Overview

Tracked Posts
1
Total Impressions
0
Total Likes
0
Retweets & Quotes
0
Comments
0

Social Momentum Summary

Total Engagement - Comments: 0, Retweets: 0, Likes: 0, Impressions: 0

Verbatim Community Citations & Social Evidence 1 source posts analyzed

@GOATNetwork

We benchmarked ML-DSA-65 against secp256k1 on CometBFT v0.40.0's actual code paths before committing. Verification is 7.4x faster. Nearly all of what a secp256k1 verification spends today is ECDSA's curve math, plus decompressing the public key on every call. ML-DSA-65 is

The image displays a benchmark comparison titled "VERIFICATION: 7.4X FASTER," showing ML-DSA-65 versus secp256k1 on CometBFT v0.40.0's code paths, where verification operations run 7.4x faster (mean) and 6.9x faster (p95) on ML-DSA-65, while signing is 4.3x to 10.8x slower—all conducted on an Intel Xeon Platinum 8375C across 300 independent keys with 20 runs each. The takeaway, aligned with the accompanying post, highlights that the expensive part of secp256k1 verification was always ECDSA's curve math and public key decompression, not the post-quantum scheme itself.

AI visual note: The image displays a benchmark comparison titled "VERIFICATION: 7.4X FASTER," showing ML-DSA-65 versus secp256k1 on CometBFT v0.40.0's code paths, where verification operations run 7.4x faster (mean) and 6.9x faster (p95) on ML-DSA-65, while signing is 4.3x to 10.8x slower—all conducted on an Intel Xeon Platinum 8375C across 300 independent keys with 20 runs each. The takeaway, aligned with the accompanying post, highlights that the expensive part of secp256k1 verification was always ECDSA's curve math and public key decompression, not the post-quantum scheme itself.

Contributing Voices for $WINDCHILL

@whalewatchalert