Nine cryptocurrency companies have joined forces to establish the Quantum Alliance, an initiative aimed at preparing blockchain networks for potential quantum attacks. However, participants remain divided over when such a threat could emerge and whether Bitcoin held in vulnerable addresses should be frozen as a precaution.
The potential fate of Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto’s estimated 1.1 million BTC, along with millions of other coins that could become vulnerable to advanced quantum computers, has fueled an ongoing debate across the cryptocurrency industry.
Christopher Smith, chief executive of quantum-resistant layer-1 blockchain Quantus, warned that whoever develops a cryptographically relevant quantum computer first could gain access to billions of dollars worth of vulnerable Bitcoin, potentially with support from a national government.
Smith told CoinDesk that the first party to develop a cryptographically relevant quantum computer, or CRQC, could be positioned to seize the exposed coins, possibly with the approval of its government. He expressed hope that the first country to achieve this capability would be one that supports Bitcoin.
His warning came as nine crypto companies announced the Quantum Alliance on Thursday. The initiative aims to establish shared security standards and coordinate preparations for potential quantum threats to Bitcoin, Ethereum and other blockchain networks.
The underlying concern is that sufficiently advanced quantum computers could use a wallet’s publicly exposed cryptographic key to derive its private key. An attacker could then gain control of the associated funds and transfer them without authorization.
The alliance estimates that approximately 6.4 million BTC, representing 30.2% of Bitcoin’s total supply, have public keys that are already exposed. However, the group emphasized that these coins cannot currently be stolen through this method because existing quantum computers do not have the computational power required to break the cryptography.
When Could Quantum Computing Threaten Bitcoin?
One of the central questions facing the industry is how much time Bitcoin has before quantum computers become capable of compromising its security.
Bryn Bennett, chief revenue officer at The Vault, said there is no reliable date for when such a machine could emerge, although estimates have continued to move closer. He argued that businesses responsible for safeguarding digital assets should focus on whether they can complete a security transition in time, rather than debating whether the threat will materialize in 2028 or 2035.
Richard Carback, chief technology officer at Postquant Labs, offered a more urgent assessment, saying he considers 2028 a realistic possibility for the arrival of a machine capable of breaking today’s cryptographic systems.
Recent research has lowered some estimates of the computing resources required to attack Bitcoin and Ethereum. Nevertheless, no existing quantum computer can currently break the cryptographic protections used by either network, and experts continue to disagree over when the necessary capabilities might become available.
Should Bitcoin Freeze Coins Vulnerable to Quantum Attacks?
Beyond estimating the timeline, the industry faces a difficult policy question: should Bitcoin developers restrict or freeze coins that could become vulnerable before quantum computers reach the necessary level of capability?
Carback favors moving vulnerable assets into more secure arrangements rather than freezing them outright. Bennett, meanwhile, believes the issue involves a broader question of responsibility and network governance.
Bennett told CoinDesk that no single organization has authority over the entire problem. Custodians are responsible for protecting assets belonging to their clients, he argued, rather than taking control of coins considered abandoned. Any decision to freeze Bitcoin would therefore be a governance matter for the network itself, not an individual industry participant.
He also warned that freezing funds would replace one security concern with another by raising difficult questions about property rights and the principle of neutrality in cryptocurrency networks.
The debate has been developing for some time. Binance founder Changpeng Zhao has suggested freezing Satoshi Nakamoto’s estimated 1.1 million BTC if the coins remain untouched as quantum computing advances. Bitcoin developer Jameson Lopp has also proposed restricting vulnerable coins to prevent potential theft by future quantum attackers.
Critics, however, argue that freezing Bitcoin without its owner’s consent would undermine one of the network’s fundamental principles: that no central authority should be able to confiscate a holder’s assets.
Transitioning Bitcoin to Quantum-Resistant Security
Protecting Bitcoin against future quantum attacks would require replacing the digital signature schemes used to authorize transactions with cryptographic methods designed to withstand quantum computing threats. Such a transition would require coordination among protocol developers, miners, wallet providers, exchanges, custodians and individual users.
Bennett said there is no dependable estimate of the total cost, arguing that the biggest challenge would not necessarily be developing the cryptography itself. Coordinating the changes across wallets, exchanges, custodians and protocol developers could prove more difficult.
New signature systems could also require more data for each transaction, potentially increasing blockchain storage requirements, raising fees or reducing the number of transactions Bitcoin can process. Researchers are exploring approaches to limit these effects while improving long-term security.
The Quantum Alliance, whose members include Hacken, Charles Hoskinson’s Midnight Foundation, Quantus and Postquant Labs, plans to develop shared security tests and publish guidance to help blockchain networks transition toward quantum-resistant systems.
Carback has also proposed placing vulnerable coins in a trust structure that would allow their owners to recover them by proving ownership. The approach offers one possible alternative to permanently freezing assets, although its practical and governance implications remain unresolved.
For Bitcoin holders, the central challenge is preparing for advances in quantum computing without compromising the network’s foundational principles. Protecting potentially vulnerable funds will require technical upgrades and broad coordination, while decisions about restricting access to existing coins will continue to raise difficult questions about ownership, fairness and Bitcoin’s resistance to centralized control.
About The Author
More Stories
Altcoins Outperform Bitcoin as Celestia Surges 16% Amid Fed Rate Uncertainty
Bitcoin Holds Near $82K as Markets Digest Fed Chair Warsh’s Remarks
MSCI Approves New Rules That Could Remove Strategy and Metaplanet From Indexes