Changpeng Zhao of Binance advocates for freezing Satoshi Nakamoto's bitcoins to prevent theft by quantum computers, but opinions vary widely.
By Olivier Acuna|Edited by Sheldon Reback Jul 4, 2026, 6:00 p.m. 3 min readMake preferred on ShareShare this articleCopy linkX (Twitter)LinkedInFacebookEmailMake preferred on CZ suggested giving Satoshi up to 12 months to act on their bitcoin. (Jesse Hamilton/CoinDesk)SummaryShow- Changpeng Zhao, the founder of Binance, proposed freezing Satoshi Nakamoto’s approximately 1.1 million bitcoins if they remain untouched when quantum computers pose a threat to Bitcoin's cryptography. This idea has sparked a division among industry leaders.
- Critics, including investor Michael Terpin, argue that freezing Satoshi’s coins infringes on Bitcoin’s foundational principle of being a permissionless system and express skepticism about achieving consensus in the decentralized community regarding such a change.
- Other industry experts, such as developer Jameson Lopp and Bitwise’s Matt Hougan, contend that the focus should be on equipping Bitcoin for a future dominated by quantum computing, suggesting measures like phased cryptographic transitions or placing Satoshi’s coins in a legal trust, although they agree that the discussion remains largely hypothetical.
Changpeng Zhao's idea to freeze the estimated 1.1 million bitcoins owned by Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto is aimed at preventing their potential theft by quantum computers, a notion that has resulted in differing opinions among prominent investors, developers, and entrepreneurs in the crypto space.
Zhao, commonly referred to as CZ, presented this concept during a podcast last month alongside Galaxy Digital's Alex Thorn. He proposed allowing Satoshi six to twelve months to transfer the bitcoins, currently valued at about $68 billion given bitcoin’s price of approximately $62,000. If no action is taken, he suggested that the community could consider freezing those addresses.
"If we don't do anything with it, then we're basically giving it to somebody who's going to hack it," Zhao stated.
One concern is that if someone with access to these tokens were to sell them, it could flood the market and lead to a price collapse. Additionally, there is apprehension about the blockchain taking control of an individual's assets in a system designed to be open and trustless.
Michael Terpin, founder and CEO of Transform Ventures and author of Bitcoin Supercycle, expressed that freezing Satoshi's coins would breach a boundary that Bitcoin has never crossed. Terpin, often referred to as the 'crypto godfather' for his early involvement in the industry, remarked, "While I appreciate the proactivity in CZ's proposal, it begins a slippery slope of creating permission in a permissionless system relative to personal property."
He also noted, "If indeed [Satoshi] is dead, as many Bitcoiners believe, then only a quantum hack unlocks the coins. While it would hurt the price significantly if the coins were dumped, it would be a one-time event and post-quantum bitcoin would recover." Terpin raised doubts about whether the decentralized Bitcoin community could ever reach consensus on such a proposal, stating, "Considering it took years just to implement SegWit, I doubt a quick consensus could be formed here."
Jameson Lopp, co-founder and chief security officer at Casa, commented that CZ's remarks overlook a more significant issue. "I don't really consider it a proposal so much as him musing upon the threat," Lopp said in an email interview.
To Freeze or Not to Freeze
Lopp, a prominent cypherpunk and Bitcoin developer, emphasized that the discussion is not solely about Satoshi's coins but rather about preparing Bitcoin for a future where current cryptographic measures may no longer be reliable. “I think this is not a binary debate of ‘to freeze or not to freeze.’”
He has authored Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 361 (BIP-361), which outlines a gradual transition to quantum-resistant cryptography.
"The goal is to create incentives and deadlines so users, exchanges, custodians, wallets, and institutions actually migrate in a timely fashion," Lopp noted, adding that in April he stated it would be better to freeze Satoshi’s trove along with millions of other inactive bitcoins than to risk them falling into the hands of hackers.
Matt Hougan, chief investment officer at Bitwise, opposed both the idea of allowing the coins to be stolen and of freezing them outright. He pointed to a suggestion by Nic Carter of Castle Island Ventures to place Satoshi's bitcoins into a legal trust until ownership can be verified through historical electronic records.
Philosophical Dilemmas
"I actually like Nic Carter's proposal," Hougan expressed via email. "It avoids the philosophical challenges of both CZ's suggestion and the 'let whatever happens' perspective."
Hougan argued that the market already perceives Satoshi's holdings as effectively inaccessible, suggesting that any change would introduce more risk than benefit. "I don't think there is any way that developments around Satoshi's coins are positive for the ecosystem," he said. "The market already accounts for them as frozen forever."
At this stage, the conversation remains largely theoretical. Researchers continue to explore practical post-quantum cryptography for Bitcoin, and no agreement has been established on how the network should react if its encryption becomes compromised.