Summary
- Coinbase's quantum advisory council emphasizes the necessity for blockchain communities to initiate migration planning for a post-quantum era.
- The report suggests that approximately 7 million Bitcoin may be at risk from future quantum threats due to the reuse of addresses and exposed public keys.
- The primary unresolved issue is not technical but rather concerns the fate of coins that remain unmoved to quantum-safe addresses.
Coinbase's quantum advisory council is calling on blockchain developers to start preparing for a post-quantum future immediately, asserting that the necessary upgrades for Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other networks should not be postponed while waiting for a consensus on how to handle at-risk or abandoned coins.
A recent report released on Thursday highlights one of the industry's most pressing issues: the fate of cryptocurrencies whose owners fail to transition to quantum-safe addresses.
“Currently, no quantum computer can compromise blockchain cryptography,” the council noted. “However, the timelines are unpredictable, and the crypto community must begin preparations now rather than simply debating the timing of the threat's arrival.”
Established in January, Coinbase's Independent Advisory Board on Quantum Computing and Blockchain assembles experts from both academia and the industry, including members from Stanford University, the University of Texas at Austin, the Ethereum Foundation, Eigen Labs, Bar-Ilan University, and UC Santa Barbara, to analyze quantum risks facing blockchain networks.
This report follows warnings from researchers indicating that a "cryptographically relevant quantum computer"—capable of breaking the elliptic curve digital signatures that protect Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other major blockchains—might be developed as soon as 2030.
The advisory council expressed concern that millions of Bitcoin stored in legacy addresses, where public keys are already exposed, could be directly threatened by future quantum attacks.
“Many of these are thought to belong to Satoshi or to be funds whose owners have lost access to their keys,” they stated. “Considering address reuse across various types, approximately 7 million Bitcoin are currently regarded as vulnerable to quantum threats.”
The report presents three potential strategies for coins that do not migrate to quantum-safe addresses. The first option is to permanently freeze (or burn) these coins after a certain deadline. The second option is to take no action, allowing users to decide, while noting that “forcing coins to be burned infringes on property rights and creates a precedent of network-level interference, conflicting with Bitcoin's fundamental principles.” The third option involves implementing intermediate measures, such as limiting the number of vulnerable coins that can be transacted per block or accepting alternative cryptographic proofs instead of legacy signatures, enabling users to “pre-commit to migrations without publicly moving funds.”
“We emphasize that these proposals can coexist; there is no reason not to implement multiple or all of them, as each has unique benefits,” they stated.
This discussion arises as significant blockchain networks begin to strategize for a post-quantum future.
In January, the Ethereum Foundation assembled a team to facilitate Ethereum's transition to post-quantum security, examining the possibility of substituting validator and wallet signatures with quantum-resistant options. In February, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin outlined a roadmap for quantum upgrades.
In April, the Coinbase advisory council cautioned that proof-of-stake networks, including Ethereum and Solana, may be particularly susceptible to future quantum attacks due to the validator signatures securing these blockchains, which could potentially be compromised by quantum computers in the future.
On Tuesday, the Stellar Development Foundation revealed a plan for transitioning users to quantum-safe cryptography. Meanwhile, Bitcoin developers are still debating how to manage vulnerable coins and the fate of those that remain unmoved.
“The appropriate time to prepare for a cryptographic shift is before it becomes critical,” a spokesperson for the Coinbase Advisory Board previously remarked. “While we believe customer assets are secure at present, the industry should not equate ‘not imminent’ with ‘not important.’”