"Post-quantum" is a phrase this ecosystem has learned to use carefully, because it has a history of using it carelessly. The engineering document on the subject opens by saying so. Here is what is true.
What is done, and checkable
| Piece | Where | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| ML-DSA (FIPS 204) inside the Wasm runtime | pallet-pqc-keys | Real signature verification in the runtime — not a side service — compiling to wasm32-unknown-unknown |
| Per-account PQC level | AccountPqcLevels | Each account chooses its level |
| Sealed accounts | CuentasSelladas | A sealed account rejects classical signatures |
| In the transaction path | CheckPqcPolicy, first in SignedExtra | Checked before anything else |
Sealing is the part that matters. Registering a post-quantum key alone protects nothing: the day classical curves fall, an attacker simply signs classically and ignores the registered key — armour on, door open. Sealing closes the door: from then on only an ML-DSA signature moves the account.
Because CheckPqcPolicy is the first signed extension, every EmpoorioChain transaction carries two bytes for it even when no PQC signature is attached (None, None). That is the detail that makes the chain's envelope differ from stock Substrate — and the detail every client must encode.
What is not protected, and why
Consensus is classical. Aura signs blocks with sr25519; GRANDPA signs finality with ed25519; the authorities' public keys are on chain for anyone to read. An attacker with a quantum computer able to break elliptic curves could forge blocks and finality justifications even if every account were post-quantum. Protecting accounts while consensus stays classical is a good lock on a glass door.
This is not an EmpoorioChain shortcoming to fix locally: there is no post-quantum Aura or GRANDPA in the Polkadot SDK, and no Substrate chain in production has post-quantum consensus. Chains that say "we are post-quantum" are, at best, describing what EmpoorioChain describes here — accounts.
What may be said
EmpoorioChain lets a DMS account be protected with ML-DSA post-quantum signatures, optionally, for accounts that explicitly seal themselves. Verification is in the runtime.
What may not be said
- ❌ "EmpoorioChain is post-quantum." The consensus is not.
- ❌ "DMS is protected against quantum computers." Only sealed accounts are, and only against direct theft, not against block forgery.
- ❌ "The first post-quantum chain." Neither true nor checkable.
- ❌ "Transactions are post-quantum." They are signed with sr25519 unless the account opted in.
The differentiator, stated at its real size
ML-DSA is the NIST standard; everyone will implement it. What EmpoorioChain has is that FRAME lets it do so today, in the runtime, per account, without waiting for the ecosystem to standardise it. That is a calendar advantage, and it is worth having. An investor or auditor who hears "post-quantum" will ask about consensus within thirty seconds; arriving with this answer already written earns more than the bigger claim would.
Related: privacy
pallet-privacy and the ZK verifier pallets exist for selective disclosure (prove a property without revealing the identity). The KryptoOS repository's earlier ZK module was found to attach the secret in the clear and was deleted; the privacy compliance model is documented; the mainnet gate requires a PQC/ZK audit that has not been commissioned. Status: designed and partially implemented, unaudited.
Based on POST_CUANTICO_HASTA_DONDE_LLEGA.md (2026-08-27), PQC_SECURITY_LEVELS.md, FORMATO_DE_EXTRINSECOS.md and MAINNET_GATE.md.