TechFlow reported on June 13 that a Coinbase-led advisory council of cryptography experts has released a report saying Bitcoin should immediately begin preparing for quantum-computing attacks. The council did not take a clear position on whether millions of bitcoins that could be stolen by quantum computing in the future should be frozen. The report separates the issue into two tracks: technical work on migration should start now, while the decision over asset treatment remains a matter for Bitcoin community governance.
The debate has shifted from signature technology to legacy holdings
The council includes several leading experts, among them Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake. According to the report, the main controversy is no longer how to introduce quantum-resistant signature technology, but how to handle bitcoins that remain unmigrated for a long period. Bitcoin’s existing ECDSA and Schnorr signature schemes are the systems being discussed in the context of a future quantum-resistant transition.
One side of the debate calls for a final deadline for migration. Under that approach, support for the existing ECDSA and Schnorr signature schemes would end after the deadline, and assets that had not been migrated would be frozen. Supporters of this approach argue that it would prevent future quantum attackers from obtaining a large amount of BTC and disrupting the market. This view prioritizes risk containment and focuses on coins held in addresses that remain inactive or fail to complete migration.
Freezing legacy BTC faces objections over Bitcoin’s core principles
The opposing view argues that freezing legacy BTC would amount to asset confiscation and would conflict with Bitcoin’s core principles of immutability and full user control over assets. Critics of a freeze also warn that using quantum-resistant migration as a reason to freeze coins could create a precedent for future asset freezes under regulatory pressure, changing the boundary of Bitcoin governance and user control.
The Coinbase advisory council said these approaches are not mutually exclusive and could be combined in practice. However, it refused to take a position on the question of whether legacy BTC should be frozen, saying the final decision should be made through Bitcoin community governance. The report emphasized two points: technical development for quantum-resistant signature migration should begin immediately and should not wait for governance disputes to conclude; users also need clear risk communication so that long-term uncertainty does not affect the Bitcoin ecosystem.