Bitcoin is not 20 years old

Comment by: Youssef El Madarsi, General Manager of Naoris Protocol

Some Bitcoin (BTC) advocates argue that the network faces no meaningful quantum threat in the near future, citing NIST-approved post-quantum standards and suggesting that Bitcoin could easily upgrade before any cryptography-related quantum computer appears. This confidence is based on the dangerous assumption that quantum risk only exists if a machine can crack keys instantaneously. Adam Back argues that Bitcoin has at least 20-40 years to develop itself, but quantum risk is active today.

Bitcoin can't rely on a multi-decade improvement path at leisure.

Some readers may strongly object to this, quantum timelines are still too uncertain to justify urgent action and raising alarms may cause unnecessary panic. The facts do not support complacency.

These processors and faster error-correction mechanisms will allow the company to take advantage of quantum computing by 2026 and deliver early fault-tolerant systems by 2029, IBM says, making a big leap toward practical quantum computing with its new generation of chips.

Vitalik Buterin said at the 2025 Devconnect conference that quantum computers could break elliptic-curve cryptography sooner than expected, possibly even before the 2028 US election, and argued that Ethereum should transition to quantum-resistant cryptography within a few years. This contradicts the convenient narrative of some Bitcoin enthusiasts, which suggests that even Ethereum's founder thinks the quantum timeline is much tighter than people want to believe.

Quantum risk is already associated with the market.

Additionally, Deloitte recently reported that about 4 million BTC, 25% of the total usable supply, have public keys stored in addresses that are vulnerable to quantum attacks. Researchers have warned that a sufficiently advanced quantum computer could use Shor's algorithm to generate private keys from exposed public keys.

This isn't just for Bitcoin. Ethereum and most blockchains today rely on elliptic curve cryptography, and Quantum breaks that. Buterin has already outlined emergency procedures that will allow quantum computers to crack Ethereum accounts.

The argument that “we can improve later” has failed in practice

The argument that Bitcoin has decades to prepare for quantum threats rests on the belief that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) can easily adopt post-quantum cryptography standards before any meaningful attack is made, but improving Bitcoin is no easy task. It is a fundamental modification of the protocol's signature scheme. According to researchers at the University of Kent, upgrading Bitcoin to a quantum-resistant cryptosystem could take up to 75 days of downtime, possibly more than 300 days if the network has to operate at reduced capacity to limit attack viruses during migration. Prolonged global devastation to a trillion dollar asset class is not something the industry can count on as an acceptable “just in time” fix.

Related: Quantum Threat Extends Past Wallet Hacks For Bitcoin

Although Bitcoin is technically able to migrate seamlessly, political reality poses another obstacle. Bitcoin's governance culture is notoriously resistant to change, as it has been over the years, with relatively modest improvement in the debate and coordination required for Taproot. A mandatory, high-level migration to an entirely new cryptographic base would result in ideological conflict, potential chain-breaking, and long-term uncertainty. The idea that such a reformation can be comfortably accomplished decades later ignores the adversarial dynamics that Bitcoin faced with very simple reforms.

Meanwhile, the quantum timeline is accelerating faster than many expect. Recognizing the threat posed by quantum computers to current cryptography, the European Commission and EU member states have recently released an integrated roadmap to transition the EU's digital infrastructure to post-quantum cryptography (PQC). The plan sets a uniform timeline: all member states must launch national PQC strategies and initial migration measures by 2026. Critical infrastructure and other high-risk sectors should adopt quantum-resistant encryption by 2030. And, by 2035, the PQC transition should be complete for all upgradeable systems.

The market consequences of a delayed transition can be disastrous.

What makes this threat particularly urgent for crypto is the market effect of mismanaged transitions. If an attacker used quantum hardware to access private keys from dormant Bitcoin wallets, they could suddenly move millions of long-dormant coins, flood exchanges and destroy price levels. Similarly, a malicious quantum miner that could continuously solve Bitcoin's proof-of-work puzzle would undermine the decentralization of mining, turning the global industry into an oligopoly dominated by quantum-armed actors. These risks will reshape the market structure ahead of any 20-40-year safe window.

Post-quantum cryptography is important, but it must be adopted before adversaries develop hardware, not after. NIST standards are a roadmap, not a guarantee. The transition will be long, contentious and disruptive. Pretending it could last for decades would leave Bitcoin and the broader crypto ecosystem vulnerable to the biggest security challenge of the century.

The crypto industry has spent 15 years championing decentralization, trustlessness, and user sovereignty. Quantum computing now poses a new challenge: waiting for a crisis until the industry acts proactively or takes action. The cost of being wrong far outweighs the cost of being prepared early.

Many may believe that Bitcoin has a decades-long runway. The evidence points to another conclusion: the quantum clock is already winding down, and the market is quietly adjusting. The only question is whether the industry should act before it expires.

Comment by: Youssef El Madarsi, General Manager of Naoris Protocol.

This opinion article presents the professional view of the contributor and may not reflect the views of Cointelegraph.com. While this content has undergone editorial review to ensure clarity and relevance, Cointelegraph remains committed to transparent reporting and maintaining the highest journalistic standards. Readers are encouraged to do their own research before taking any action related to the company.