Quantum Computers Won’t Break Bitcoin’s Code, They’ll Break Its Politics

by

James Check, the guy who runs Checkonchain (a Bitcoin onchain analysis service-because, of course, that’s a thing), went off on Monday with an absolute gem of a hot take. According to him, the quantum threat is less of a “technology” issue and more of a “can-we-please-agree-on-something-for-once” problem. You know, consensus problems-because nothing screams “innovation” like a bunch of nerds arguing over what color to make the buttons.

In his Monday X post (X = Twitter, because that’s how we’re living now), Check basically said, “No chance we’re ever going to agree to freeze Bitcoin that isn’t moved to quantum-resistant addresses.” Translation: all that Bitcoin just sitting there, untouched for years? Yeah, it’s going to flood the market when quantum computers inevitably break into those old addresses. Oops! Too bad it was your grandma’s retirement fund.

BitBo data (yup, that’s real) shows that 32.4% of Bitcoin hasn’t been touched in the last five years, 16.8% in over ten years, and the list goes on. The question, of course, is how much of that is “lost” or just “so old no one remembers where it is”-but that’s another debate for another day.

Now, Check’s post was essentially a reply to Ceteris Paribus (fancy name, right?), the research head at Delphi Digital, who made the argument that the real issue isn’t the tech. It’s the fact that no one can agree on what to do about the old, unquantum-resistant coins. “Yeah, quantum-resistant Bitcoin is a thing,” he said, “but it doesn’t fix the problem of all that old, easily hackable Bitcoin still floating around.” Imagine the horror: your Bitcoin gets stolen by a quantum computer that doesn’t even need a password.

Back in late April, Adam Back, an early cypherpunk who got a mention in Satoshi Nakamoto’s Bitcoin white paper (look at him, all famous and stuff), told CryptoMoon that the community’s going to have to pick a side: either we ditch the old, vulnerable addresses or just sit back and watch those funds vanish. Of course, Check was all like, “Let the old coins flood the market, it’s fine.” Very chill response, James.

A fix for new addresses only

The technical stuff? Oh, it’s already there. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-because apparently they’ve got nothing better to do-endorsed multiple post-quantum cryptography schemes last year. So, theoretically, Bitcoin addresses could be quantum-resistant soon. Hooray! BIP 360 (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal, if you’re wondering) is ready and waiting. But here’s the catch: Bitcoin still uses those vulnerable Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) signatures for old addresses. And let’s not forget the shiny new Schnorr signatures for Taproot. Both are basically paper targets for quantum computers to shoot at.

Which brings us to the million-dollar question: What happens to all that lost Bitcoin, sitting in unprotected addresses? Does it just disappear into the ether like all your lost socks from the laundry?

In his conversation with CryptoMoon, Adam Back even threw out the idea that this whole quantum computing problem might finally out the elusive Satoshi Nakamoto. Yeah, imagine quantum computers stealing Nakamoto’s stash, forcing them to reveal themselves like some long-lost celebrity. Back, ever the optimist, did add that quantum computing probably wouldn’t be a problem for Bitcoin for another two to four decades. So, don’t sweat it, everyone.

Some blockchains got their fix

Not to throw shade, but Bitcoin is behind the curve on this one. Some blockchains, like Sui, Solana, Near, and Cosmos, already have a quantum-resistant fix in the works that doesn’t require switching signatures. Unfortunately, Bitcoin and Ethereum-two of the big boys-are not on the quantum-resistant bandwagon just yet. Maybe they’re just waiting for the next cool trend to hit.

This new fix relies on a signature system that creates private keys deterministically from a seed. Researchers crafted a zero-knowledge proof system (don’t ask me to explain it-I’m still not sure what a “zero-knowledge proof” even is) that could protect addresses from quantum-computer-generated fake signatures. So, that’s nice for them. Maybe they’ll send Bitcoin a postcard once they figure it out.

Read More

2025-11-24 18:22