Google has set 2029 as the deadline to complete post-quantum cryptography migration across its products, putting its schedule six years ahead of the current U.S. federal target. The move adds fresh pressure on blockchain networks already debating how urgently they need to prepare for quantum-era security risks.
In its official blog post, Google said quantum computing poses a major threat to existing cryptographic standards, with encryption and digital signatures among the most exposed areas. The company framed post-quantum migration as a requirement for keeping authentication services secure for users.
Google moves well ahead of the federal roadmap
The comparison with Washington is stark. The National Institute of Standards and Technology plans to deprecate RSA digital signatures using 2048-bit keys in 2030, with 2035 as the end date for full disallowance. The White House’s 2022 NSM-10 national security memorandum also set 2035 as the target for federal systems to finish migration.
Google’s date comes earlier than that federal timeline and even precedes some industry estimates for “Q-Day,” the point at which quantum machines become powerful enough to break current public-key cryptography. Google said it wanted to set an ambitious schedule and create a clear sense of urgency for the wider industry.
Willow and Android 17 show why Google is accelerating
The company’s stance is backed by its own quantum hardware work. Google is continuing development of its Willow chip, which it said currently has 105 qubits of computing capability. Combined with progress in quantum error correction and updated estimates on how long it may take quantum systems to break today’s cryptographic standards, that has pushed Google toward an earlier timeline.
On the software side, Google said Android 17 will include NIST-aligned post-quantum digital signature protection through ML-DSA. It also highlighted the need for “crypto agility,” meaning systems should be able to swap underlying cryptographic algorithms quickly without interrupting service.
Crypto’s core exposure centers on key security
For the digital asset sector, the main concern is clear. If quantum machines reach sufficient scale, they could break the elliptic curve cryptography behind ECDSA, exposing private keys that secure on-chain funds. That would turn a theoretical research problem into a direct asset protection issue.
There is still disagreement over the size of the attack surface. One open question is whether the greatest danger is limited to wallet addresses with public keys already revealed, or whether untouched coins could also face meaningful exposure. The source material shows no settled view across the industry.
Ethereum, Solana, and Bitcoin are taking different paths
Major blockchain ecosystems are not moving in lockstep. The Ethereum Foundation launched a Post-Quantum Ethereum resource hub on Tuesday and said it aims to bring quantum-resistant protections into the execution layer by 2029. The plan is designed to protect the network at the protocol level and cover assets worth billions of dollars.
Solana developers took a more optional route. According to the source, a quantum-resistant vault system was created in January 2025, using hash-based signatures to generate a fresh key for each transaction. It is not a chain-wide mandatory upgrade, though. Users need to move funds into a Winternitz vault to gain that added protection.
Bitcoin remains the most divided case. Adam Back, chief executive of Blockstream, argues that the quantum threat is being overstated and sees no need for action in the coming decades. On the other side, security researcher Ethan Heilman and others have proposed BIP-360, which introduces a new output type called Pay-to-Merkle-Root to reduce short-term quantum exposure for Bitcoin addresses. Heilman told CoinTelegraph that the proposal may still take seven years to be deployed.
The 2029 target is tightening the industry’s decision window
Google’s public deadline acts as a countdown for the crypto sector. Ethereum has a matching 2029 protocol-level target, yet its major hard forks have not historically been completed inside three years from proposal to activation. Solana has a working tool, but adoption depends on user choice. Bitcoin is still debating whether urgent action is needed at all.
The question is no longer only whether quantum systems will eventually threaten current cryptography. It is also whether decentralized networks can upgrade fast enough before that pressure becomes immediate.