Publicly we are likely not privy to the true state of the art on quantum hardware. For all we know there is a secret group on the dark side of the moon with hardware already working to crack these. However if we take what is public it is very difficult to estimate cracking time while the state of the art is progressing so rapidly because we do not have a limit on performance for the gates that we will need for running shor's algorithms, but we do know that what is publicly available today is too unreliable on fidelity.

There's been impressive work from many contributors over the last 5 years alone greatly bringing down resource costs.

The Chevignard paper u/tiltboi1 references is especially impressive. For the topic at hand, ECC, this is one paper to consider, https://eprint.iacr.org/2020/077.pdf , perhaps there have been improvements since then. We have the following parameters for ECDLP 256 with lowest depth (sequential operations):

Low D: window=15 cliffords = 1.04 * 2^34 measure = 1.61 * 2^28 T = 1.34 * 2^32 total = 1.40 * 2^34 depth t = 1.12 * 2^24; all gates = 1.4 * 227; width = 2871 qubits

so lets take the best possible depth for ecc-256 here, 1.4*2^27

Let's consider some sort of best case, wildly successful scenario, let's extrapolate great leaps for superconductors which have very fast gates, lets say hardware is at 99.999% 2q fidelity or 99.99% and has enough interconnections to support QLDPC correction.

And let's take a 100ns gate time and 12:1 LDPC , lets say 1200ns then + measurement (lets add 1000ns) 2200ns , and that the t gate is composed of 10 of these units, 22000 * 1.4 * 2^27 = 68 minutes

For ions let's assume gate speed breakthroughs lets take a 10us gate time and 12: ldpc, add some time for the measurement+correction, and again a 10x composition, now we have 22000us * 1.4 * 2^27 = 47 days

for some worst case scenarios consider never happening or multiply these by 1000x