Nine crypto firms launch Quantum Alliance to draft security standards for Bitcoin and Ethereum

Nine crypto firms launch Quantum Alliance to draft security standards for Bitcoin and Ethereum

N
News Editor
2026-10-16 10:57:47
Nine crypto companies said Thursday they have formed a Quantum Alliance aimed at creating common security standards for Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other blockchain networks in response to future quantum-computing threats. The group estimates that about 6.4 million BTC, or 30.2% of supply, already have exposed public keys, creating a potential attack surface if sufficiently powerful quantum machines are developed. The alliance said no existing quantum computer has the computing power needed to exploit that risk today, but debate over the timeline is sharpening. The Vault CRO Bryn Bennett said the issue is no longer whether the threat arrives in 2028 or 2035, but whether custodians can complete a migration if it comes earlier than expected. Postquant Labs CTO Richard Carback said a machine capable of breaking current cryptography by 2028 is a realistic possibility. The announcement also adds fuel to a separate dispute over whether vulnerable Bitcoin should be frozen or moved. Critics say any freeze would cut against Bitcoin’s neutrality and property-rights principles, while others argue exposed coins should be placed in trust or otherwise restricted to prevent theft.

Nine crypto companies said Thursday they have formed a Quantum Alliance to develop common security standards for Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other blockchain networks as the industry prepares for future quantum-computing threats.

The alliance estimates that roughly 6.4 million BTC, or 30.2% of the supply, already have exposed public keys. In the group’s view, a future quantum computer could work backward from a wallet’s public key, recover the private key, and steal the funds. At the same time, the alliance said no quantum computer today has enough power to carry out that kind of attack, so those coins cannot currently be stolen in this way.

Members and timeline debate

Named members include Hacken, Charles Hoskinson-backed Midnight Foundation, quantum-resistant layer-1 blockchain Quantus, and Postquant Labs.

The industry remains split on when the threat could become real. Bryn Bennett, chief revenue officer at The Vault, said no one knows the exact date, but estimated timelines keep moving lower, making the risk something institutions can already plan for. She said the question for custodians is not whether the threat appears in 2028 or 2035, but whether they can complete a migration if it arrives sooner.

Richard Carback, chief technology officer at Postquant Labs, took a more aggressive view, saying a machine capable of breaking current cryptography by 2028 is a realistic scenario.

Recent research has lowered estimates for the computing power needed to attack Bitcoin and Ethereum, but no existing machine can break their cryptography today, and forecasts remain disputed.

Dispute over freezing vulnerable coins

Another fault line centers on whether vulnerable Bitcoin should be frozen.

Bennett said no single party is responsible for the issue, and custodians protect client assets rather than abandoned assets. In her view, freezing tokens is a governance decision for the Bitcoin network, and any freeze would trade quantum-risk mitigation for a precedent affecting property rights and neutrality.

Carback said he would rather move vulnerable tokens. He proposed putting them into a trust structure that would allow holders who can prove ownership to reclaim the funds.

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao previously suggested that if quantum technology advances while Satoshi Nakamoto’s roughly 1.1 million BTC remain untouched, those holdings should be frozen. Bitcoin developer Jameson Lopp has also argued for restricting vulnerable coins to prevent theft. Critics, however, say freezing someone else’s Bitcoin runs against the promise that no one can confiscate Bitcoin.

Migration would require broad coordination

Making Bitcoin quantum resistant would require replacing the digital signatures used to authorize transactions. That would demand agreement across developers, miners, wallet providers, exchanges, and users.

New signature schemes could also take up more block space, which could raise fees or reduce the number of transactions Bitcoin can process.

This article was originally published by Bit.Fan. For more cryptocurrency news and market insights, visit www.bit.fan.
100

Disclaimer:

The market information, project data, and third-party content displayed on this platform are for industry information sharing only and do not constitute any form of investment advice or return commitment.

Cryptocurrency trading carries high risks. Users should fully assess their risk tolerance and make independent decisions. All profits, losses, and legal responsibilities are borne by the users themselves.