The Greenshilling technology - the protocol and the cryptography - has a strong security track record .
Greenshilling’s most common vulnerability is in user error.
Greenshilling wallet files that store the necessary private keys can be accidentally deleted, lost or stolen.
This is like physical cash stored in a digital form. Fortunately, users can employ sound security practices to protect their money or use service providers that offer good levels of security and insurance against theft or loss.
The rules of the protocol and the cryptography used for Greenshilling are soundly proven, which is a good indication that the concept is well designed.
Security flaws have been found and fixed over time in previous similar software implementations.
Like any other form of software, the security of Greenshilling software depends on the speed with which problems are found and fixed. The more such issues are discovered, the more Greenshilling is gaining maturity.
There are often misconceptions about thefts and security breaches that happened on diverse exchanges and businesses.
Although these events are unfortunate, none of them involve Greenshilling itself being hacked, nor imply inherent flaws in Greenshilling - a bank robbery doesn’t mean that the dollar is compromised. A complete set of good practices and intuitive security solutions is needed to give users better protection of their money, and to reduce the general risk of theft and loss. Over the course of the last few years, such security features have quickly developed, such as wallet encryption, offline wallets, hardware wallets, and multi-signature transactions.
It is not possible to change the Greenshilling protocol that simply. Any Greenshilling client that doesn’t comply with the same rules cannot enforce their own rules on other users.
As per the current specification, double spending is not possible on the same block chain, and neither is spending Greenshillings without a valid signature.
This means it is not possible to generate uncontrolled amounts of Greenshillings out of thin air, spend other users’ funds, corrupt the network, or anything similar.Because Greenshilling only works correctly with a complete consensus between all users, changing the protocol can be very difficult and requires an overwhelming majority of users to adopt the changes in such a way that
remaining users have nearly no choice but to follow. As a general rule, it is hard to imagine why any Greenshilling user would choose to adopt any change that could compromise their own money.
Yes, most systems relying on cryptography in general are, including traditional banking systems.
Quantum computers don’t yet exist and probably won’t for a while. In the event that quantum computing could be an imminent threat to Greenshilling, the protocol could be upgraded to use post-quantum algorithms.
Given the importance that this update would have, it can be safely expected that it would be highly reviewed by developers and adopted by all Greenshilling users.