#BlockchainQuantumSecurity
About BlockchainQuantumSecurity
AI-assisted math research may expose weaknesses in some proposed cryptography, while future quantum computers could threaten BTC and ETH signatures. No practical break of these signatures has been shown. NIST has issued post-quantum standards, and a US Energy Department quantum contest offers up to $215M in planned funding. Ethereum and Bitcoin developers are exploring upgrades; Coinbase has outlined key-management work. How can networks plan safe wallet migration and protect older addresses?
Populært
Siste
BlockchainQuantumSecurity Populære innlegg
I think JD made the right call publishing his post on potential AI/Quantum threats.
I'd much rather have researchers from a Foundation that are looking out for my best interests (even if it's not something I want to hear), rather than simply leaving me in the dark based on "we'll see what happens" until "whoops, it's too late."
The looming threat to wallet security, and the need for heads down shipping on making Ethereum quantum-secure is of course going to make us feel uncomfortable, but that doesn't diminish the fact that AI is speeding basically everything up much quicker than anticipated, and the need for caution and awareness has never been more important in our industry.
JD's post outlined that there's "no need to rush," but it also means that everyone should be aware, and have some sort of plan in place for Bunker Mode if/when the need becomes applicable.
In an industry like crypto where hacks happen every other week, in my humble opinion, there's absolutely nothing wrong with exercising a bit of caution, because it's much better to be safe than sorry (especially when peoples livelihoods are on the line).
Quantum computers threaten exposed private keys rather than blockchains, Europol warns
By: Naeem Farooq (nEmErAnA)
EU law enforcement agencies urged developers, exchanges, and users to initiate phased post-quantum migrations immediately to prevent future unauthorized fund transfers.$BTC $OKB #BlockchainQuantumSecurity
-2,18%
Snapshot ved 12. okt. 2026, 11:40
Post-quantum is slowly becoming a crypto meta, and I think there's a much bigger infrastructure shift developing behind it.
We've spent years discussing blockchain scalability, privacy, and interoperability.
But there's another problem that could eventually force major chains to redesign parts of their infrastructure.
The cryptography protecting billions of dollars in onchain assets may not remain secure forever.
And recent developments suggest developers are taking that possibility seriously.
➥ First, look at what changed in 2026.
In March, Google Quantum AI published research showing that breaking the elliptic-curve cryptography used by major blockchains could require significantly fewer resources than previously estimated.
Its research outlined an attack requiring approximately:
• 1,200 logical qubits
• 90 million Toffoli gates
These are theoretical resource estimates, not evidence that existing quantum computers can execute the attack.
Still, reducing the estimated resources changes how developers should think about migration timelines.
Bitcoin and Ethereum rely on elliptic-curve signatures to authorize transactions.
A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could potentially derive private keys from exposed public keys.
That makes wallet security one of the first areas requiring attention.
➥ Ethereum is already preparing.
In September 2026, the Ethereum Foundation outlined a target to make Ethereum L1 quantum-resistant across execution, consensus, and data by December 2029.
That's a major commitment.
The work involves replacing vulnerable cryptographic components, introducing more flexible account authentication, and upgrading validator signatures.
Ethereum isn't waiting for quantum computers to become an immediate threat.
It's preparing because changing the security architecture of a live blockchain takes years.
➥ Starknet is approaching the problem differently.
In July, an experimental quantum-resistant wallet successfully executed a transaction on Starknet mainnet.
The transaction reportedly cost around $0.06.
What's notable is that Starknet's account architecture allows wallets to change their signature verification logic without requiring a network-wide hard fork.
That's a useful advantage when cryptographic standards evolve.
StarkWare has also been experimenting with quantum-safe Bitcoin transactions.
According to its September research recap, optimization work reduced the estimated GPU computation cost from approximately $320 to $67.
That's roughly a 79% reduction.
The technology remains experimental, but reducing implementation costs is important if these systems are eventually going to scale.
➥ $SUI and newer networks are also entering the conversation.
$SUI has outlined plans to support post-quantum account authentication using NIST-standardized signature schemes.
Its roadmap targets native quantum-safe account support in Q1 2027.
Meanwhile, Quantus launched its post-quantum-focused mainnet in September and introduced its QTC token to the $NEAR ecosystem in October.
The approaches are different.
Ethereum is preparing to migrate an established network.
Starknet is using flexible account validation.
Sui is integrating new signature standards.
Quantus is building around post-quantum cryptography from the beginning.
➥ Here's where I think the investment thesis becomes more important.
Post-quantum security isn't necessarily about creating another category of coins.
It's about upgrading the cryptographic infrastructure that existing financial systems depend on.
That creates several areas worth researching:
→ Quantum-resistant wallets and account infrastructure
→ Post-quantum signature verification
→ Cryptographic agility and account abstraction
→ Quantum-resistant interoperability and custody
→ Infrastructure that reduces the computational cost of larger signatures
But there's an important distinction.
A blockchain adopting quantum-resistant cryptography doesn't automatically make its native token more valuable.
The technology can become essential without creating meaningful token demand.
That's why I'm paying more attention to implementation, developer adoption, and actual network utility than projects simply adding "quantum" to their branding.
One final point.
NIST already finalized its first three post-quantum cryptography standards in 2024.
And in 2026, the migration conversation has become more urgent across both traditional technology companies and blockchain networks.
No one knows exactly when cryptographically relevant quantum computers will arrive.
But waiting until existing cryptography becomes vulnerable would leave very little time to coordinate a safe migration.
My view: post-quantum could become one of crypto's next major infrastructure narratives.
The question isn't which project mentions quantum resistance the loudest.
It's which networks can actually upgrade their security without compromising usability, performance, or decentralization.
That's where I'd focus my research.
My current watchlist:
$QANX → @QANplatform
$ZEC → @zcash
$CELL → @cellframenet
$ALGO → @Algorand
$NAORIS → @NaoXprotocol
$XDC → @XDCNetwork
$QRL → @QRLedger
$STRK → @Starknet
$ABEL → @PQabelian
$HBAR → @hedera
$IOTA → @iota
$CKB → @NervosNetwork
$XNT → @NeptunePrivacy
Quantum risk is not an emergency trade signal: the source says no practical break of BTC or ETH signatures has been shown. The harder issue is operational. Post-quantum standards and upgrade research matter only if wallet migration can reach older addresses without turning key management into a new failure point. Preparedness should be measured by migration paths, not headlines.
#BlockchainQuantumSecurity
High conviction bets are rarely made in the middle of a crowded narrative. Right now, CT is obsessed with shiny consumer app wrappers and surface level points farming. Meanwhile, @quipnetwork is down in the mud quietly tackling the infrastructure wall that hits us the second classical hardware runs out of runway.
Most people look at quantum and see an academic buzzword or an abstract threat to $BTC signatures 10 years out. The real play isn't just post quantum defense; it’s building a functional, decentralized compute marketplace where QPUs, GPUs, and CPUs can actually coordinate and verify complex workloads on chain without relying on centralized cloud monopolies.
The hardest part of Web3 infra isn't writing a marketing post it’s designing the settlement math, consensus proofs, and execution verification for next gen compute architectures. When the crowd finally realizes that AI scaling and optimization algorithms are going to scream for hybrid quantum classical pipelines, the groundwork laid today becomes the moat.
Understanding the problem early is how you front-run the meta.
Are you tracking protocols building deep compute and post quantum infrastructure now, or are you waiting for the mainstream narrative to package it for you after TGE?
you're not late to quantum. it hasn't started.
the machine that breaks a wallet key doesn't exist yet.
the people building it have a decade of funding and no reason to stop.
AI had its run when the tech showed up. quantum's tech is still on the way.
every headline between now and then is a reminder that this meta isn't done.
we'll be here for all of them.
$QHOST
gm fam
Just saw the note about AI potentially cracking ECDSA math before any real quantum machine shows up.
@Americanfort_io came back with ZKPoSP as the response.
Same seed. Same address. Nothing has to move.
The wallet proves it controls the full BIP32 derivation path behind the existing address by using a hash-based zero-knowledge proof instead of the usual elliptic curve signature. That shifts the security assumption completely off the curve.
I keep telling myself I’ll migrate the old wallets eventually. Then I don’t. Most people are in the same spot the addresses with exposed keys just stay there.
That migration friction is the actual weak point, not the underlying math. ZKPoSP treats the fact that people won’t move funds as the real constraint and designs around it.
Node-side verification still needs to land, so this isn’t live tomorrow. But on the user side there are zero extra steps. That part is hard to ignore.
Still going through the paper while the Name layer keeps growing.
When was the last time you actually rotated a seed or moved funds purely for security reasons not after something already went wrong?
@Americanfort_io
I’m In Cambridge with @drakefjustin @class_lambda @ethereumfndn learning and debating with more than a hundred cryptogtaphers from all around the world. i feel like a kid super excited learning from such bright minds.
the speed at which AI is accelerating things is inhuman. i’m truly convinced that we need to accelerate and upgrade fully to post quantum cryptography. we don’t know when q-day will arrive but it’s not that far away.
i’m thankful to Justin and the ethereum community for inviting me. Justin is one of the main reasons I stayed and doubled down on Ethereum and ETH. all the money i make in the next few years will be reinvested in making ethereum and cryptography better.
