New Quantum Alliance Emerges as Millions of Bitcoin Face Potential Future Attacks

Nine cryptocurrency companies have formed the Quantum Alliance to coordinate efforts to protect blockchain networks against potential quantum computing attacks. However, the members have differing views on when quantum computers could pose a serious threat and whether Bitcoin stored in vulnerable addresses should be frozen to prevent possible theft.

The future of Satoshi Nakamoto’s estimated 1.1 million BTC, alongside millions of other Bitcoin potentially exposed to quantum attacks, has become a major topic of discussion across the crypto industry.

Christopher Smith, CEO of quantum-resistant layer-1 blockchain Quantus, warned that the first organization to develop a cryptographically relevant quantum computer could potentially access vulnerable Bitcoin worth billions of dollars. He suggested that a national government might support such an operation.

In comments to CoinDesk, Smith said the first party to develop a cryptographically relevant quantum computer (CRQC) could seize the exposed funds, potentially with government approval. He expressed hope that the first country to achieve this capability would be one that supports Bitcoin.

His remarks followed Thursday’s announcement of the Quantum Alliance, which brings together nine crypto companies to establish shared security standards and prepare Bitcoin, Ethereum and other blockchain networks for potential quantum threats.

The concern is that sufficiently advanced quantum computers could derive a wallet’s private key from its publicly exposed key. That would potentially allow an attacker to access the wallet and transfer its funds without authorization.

The alliance estimates that approximately 6.4 million BTC, accounting for 30.2% of Bitcoin’s total supply, are held in addresses with already-exposed public keys. However, the group emphasized that these coins cannot be stolen using this method with existing technology because today’s quantum computers lack the required computational power.

When Could Quantum Computing Compromise Bitcoin?

The timeline for a practical quantum attack remains uncertain, leaving developers and businesses to consider how much time they have to strengthen their security systems.

Bryn Bennett, chief revenue officer at The Vault, said there is no definitive date for when quantum computers could break current cryptography, although estimates have increasingly moved closer. He argued that custodians should focus on whether they can complete a security migration before a potential attack becomes feasible, rather than debating whether the threat will arrive in 2028 or 2035.

Richard Carback, chief technology officer at Postquant Labs, takes a more urgent view, describing 2028 as a realistic possibility for a machine capable of breaking today’s cryptographic systems.

Recent research has reduced some estimates of the computing resources required to attack Bitcoin and Ethereum. Nevertheless, no existing quantum computer can currently break the cryptography protecting either network. Predictions about when a machine with those capabilities might emerge remain contested.

Should Bitcoin Freeze Potentially Vulnerable Coins?

The possibility of quantum-enabled theft has created another difficult debate: whether Bitcoin should restrict or freeze coins that could become vulnerable before attackers develop the necessary technology.

Carback favors moving vulnerable funds into more secure arrangements instead of freezing them. Bennett, meanwhile, believes the problem raises broader questions about responsibility and governance across the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Bennett told CoinDesk that custodians are responsible for protecting their clients’ holdings, not taking control of assets that appear to have been abandoned. He argued that any decision to freeze Bitcoin would need to be considered at the network level rather than imposed by individual companies.

He also cautioned that freezing coins would introduce another risk by setting a precedent that could affect property rights and Bitcoin’s principle of neutrality.

The debate has already involved prominent figures in the industry. Binance founder Changpeng Zhao has proposed freezing Satoshi Nakamoto’s estimated 1.1 million BTC if the coins remain untouched as quantum technology advances. Bitcoin developer Jameson Lopp has likewise suggested restricting vulnerable coins to prevent potential future theft.

Critics argue that freezing holdings without an owner’s consent would conflict with Bitcoin’s foundational promise that users can control their assets without a central authority having the power to confiscate them.

Preparing Bitcoin for Post-Quantum Security

Protecting Bitcoin against potential quantum attacks would require replacing the digital signature methods used to authorize transactions with cryptographic alternatives designed to resist quantum computing. Such a transition would require cooperation among developers, miners, wallet providers, exchanges, custodians and individual users.

Bennett said no reliable estimate exists for the total cost of the transition. He argued that the bigger challenge may be coordinating implementation across wallets, exchanges, custodians and protocol developers, rather than developing the cryptographic technology alone.

New signature methods could also increase the amount of data required for each transaction. This could raise blockchain storage demands, increase transaction fees or reduce Bitcoin’s transaction capacity. Researchers are working on ways to manage these trade-offs while improving the network’s resistance to future quantum attacks.

The Quantum Alliance includes Hacken, Charles Hoskinson’s Midnight Foundation, Quantus and Postquant Labs, among other companies. Its plans include creating shared security tests and publishing guidance to help existing blockchain networks adopt quantum-resistant technologies.

Carback has also suggested placing vulnerable coins in a trust arrangement that would allow legitimate owners to reclaim their funds by demonstrating ownership. The proposal offers a possible alternative to freezing the assets, although its practical and governance implications remain unresolved.

Bitcoin’s challenge is to prepare for future quantum computing advances without weakening the principles on which the network is built. Protecting potentially exposed holdings will require technical upgrades and coordinated action, while decisions about restricting existing coins will continue to raise difficult questions about property rights, fairness and decentralized control.