BitMEX Research has put forward a “Canary Fund” proposal aimed at addressing quantum computing risks without immediately freezing older Bitcoin holdings. The idea is simple in structure but heavy in implications: do not lock vulnerable coins based on a hypothetical threat, wait until an actual quantum attack is proven on-chain, then consider activating defensive measures.
A response to the BIP-361 freeze debate
The proposal was introduced in April 2026 as a direct answer to BIP-361, a plan that suggested freezing older Bitcoin addresses over time to reduce exposure to future quantum attacks. According to the source material, roughly 34% of Bitcoin, or about 6.9 million coins, still sits in older addresses that could be exposed if quantum capabilities become strong enough.
That is where the conflict begins. Freezing coins before any attack is observed runs into Bitcoin’s long-held ownership and decentralization principles. The source ties that tension to a familiar line in the ecosystem: “not your keys, not your coins.” BitMEX’s alternative is built around a proof-first model rather than a freeze-first one.
How the special wallet is meant to work
The Canary Fund relies on a dedicated Bitcoin address created with a Nothing-Up-My-Sleeve (NUMS) method. In practical terms, the setup is meant to publicly demonstrate that no one controls the private key for that address. Users can send Bitcoin there as a bounty for anyone capable of breaking it with a quantum computer.
If funds are ever moved out of that wallet, the event would stand as visible on-chain evidence that Bitcoin’s current security assumptions have been breached by quantum computing. At that point, the argument for freezing vulnerable coins would no longer rest on theory. If the wallet remains untouched, no freeze is triggered and the network continues operating normally.
Supporters see restraint, critics see a gap
BitMEX argues that acting too early could create damage of its own. In that framing, the Canary Fund could preserve user ownership, avoid panic tied to a broad freeze, and buy time for the network to respond only when a threat becomes real. The proposal also sits within BitMEX’s wider research track on quantum readiness, which includes Quantum Safe Lamport Signatures, Taproot Quantum Spend Paths, and Mitigating the Impact of the Quantum Freeze.
Criticism has focused on attacker incentives. Bitcoin investor Nic Carter argued that a quantum attacker may not behave openly or in a way that conveniently signals the threat to everyone else first. The concern is straightforward: an attacker could bypass the canary wallet, quietly drain large wallets, or target many smaller ones without ever triggering the warning system.
BitMEX acknowledges that the design is complex and does not remove risk. It introduces assumptions about how attackers may behave and adds technical uncertainty. For now, the Canary Fund remains a proposal rather than a confirmed Bitcoin upgrade.