Bitcoin’s Quantum Risk Is Smaller Than Feared, Researcher Says

The Bitcoin market shrugged, but the conversation about quantum computers and Bitcoin popped back into feeds this week. It’s an old worry that keeps coming up: could future machines break the cryptography that protects wallets?

Based on reports from CoinShares and comments from long-time Bitcoin voices, the real story is less about an immediate panic and more about practical planning and who would actually be at risk.

Public Keys Expose A Small Slice

Reports say that only 10,230 BTC sit in addresses where public keys are already visible, and that changes the math. Those coins would be the easiest targets if a powerful quantum machine appeared.

Around 7,000 BTC sit in mid-size wallets holding between 100 and 1,000 coins. About 3,230 BTC live in larger addresses holding between 1,000 and 10,000 coins.

At today’s values that stake is worth several hundred million dollars. That’s big money, but it’s not the same as a collapse of the protocol. An aggressive theft of that size would look like a heavy trade or a major security incident, not a network failure.

Quantum Hardware Still Falls Short

According to experts, the algorithmic threat is straightforward: Shor’s algorithm would attack elliptic-curve signatures and Grover’s algorithm would weaken SHA-256 hashing.

But reports note a huge gap between experiment and attack. Current machines run at a little over 100 qubits in experimental setups. An effective break would need millions of stable, error-corrected qubits.

That kind of hardware has not been built. In short: the math shows a possible route, but the engineering is far from ready.

Many of the more exposed addresses date back to Bitcoin’s early days and contain coins that have never moved. That makes them special. When those keys were first used, best practices were different.

Now, those same keys are a known point of weakness if quantum computing power ever arrives. Movement of those coins would be messy. Custodians, exchanges, and individual holders would all need to coordinate.

A technical fix could be proposed and adopted. The hard work would be getting people to update software and migrate keys before any real danger materializes. That is a logistics problem more than a cryptography puzzle.

According to Andreas Antonopoulos, a well-known Bitcoin and cryptocurrency expert, the threat is real but distant; he urges preparation rather than alarm.

British cryptographer Adam Back has said planning can happen in an orderly way, and panic is unnecessary so long as steps start now.

Those views line up: upgrade paths should be designed, wallets must discourage key reuse, and the community should test migration procedures.

If action is taken early, there’s ample room to make the shift without rushing or breaking systems.

Featured image from Crypto Valley Journal, chart from TradingView