Is your computer sleep mode also unsafe? 1.7 million Bitcoins face quantum attack threats

Bitcoin is facing an unexpected source of risk. While investors believe that storing private keys in a computer’s hibernation state is safe, the accelerated development of quantum computing technology is rewriting the rules of the game. According to the latest data, Bitcoin’s current price has surpassed $90,000, with a total circulating market cap of $1.8 trillion. However, among these assets, 6.7 million BTC (including 1.7 million belonging to Satoshi and early miners) are exposed to potential quantum attack risks. This is no longer a theoretical black swan but a real threat that the industry is actively addressing.

Quantum Threat Accelerates Approaching, Bitcoin Upgrade Dilemma and Time Game

The threat of quantum computing to cryptography is not a new issue, but breakthroughs in technology are changing the game. In December last year, Google, a US tech company, announced that its latest quantum processor had empirically surpassed the world’s most powerful supercomputers for specific tasks. Such progress has rekindled industry-wide deep reflections on Bitcoin security.

Bitcoin relies on elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), which can theoretically be broken by algorithms proposed by computer scientist Peter Shor. Satoshi foresaw this risk when designing Bitcoin. The key question is: how difficult is an upgrade? Based on past experiences with SegWit and Taproot upgrades, discussions, development, and consensus on quantum-resistant migration could take up to ten years. During this window, early addresses stored in computer hibernation are particularly vulnerable.

Even more challenging is that about 1.7 million BTC are stored in P2PK addresses (which expose the full public key on-chain during transactions), making it theoretically possible for quantum computers to reverse-engineer private keys from public keys. Once this defense line is breached, these “zombie coins” will be the first to be attacked. Even if Bitcoin upgrades to quantum-resistant signatures, these unclaimed assets may not be migrated. The community will face a cruel dilemma: either violate the principle of “inviolability of private property” by hard forking to freeze assets, or allow quantum attackers to steal them, leading to market collapse.

Inefficient governance is becoming a critical bottleneck. Over the past decade, significant resources have been spent on Lightning Network scaling or minor debates, showing excessive caution over small changes to block size and scripts, yet displaying puzzling indifference to threats that could wipe the system clean. In contrast, Ethereum and other public chains, with more flexible governance mechanisms or already initiated post-quantum testing, are far more resilient than Bitcoin.

Divergent Voices on Quantum Risk Timing

Industry expectations about the timing of quantum threats vary greatly.

Nic Carter, co-founder of Castle Island Ventures, recently published a lengthy article warning that developers are heading towards a crisis that could cause system collapse in a sleepwalking state. He pointed out that renowned quantum theorist Scott Aaronson describes breaking Bitcoin as an “extremely difficult engineering problem” rather than a matter requiring new physics discoveries. As organizations like NIST demand deprecation of current cryptographic algorithms between 2030 and 2035, the time window is rapidly closing.

However, this view has quickly faced pushback. Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, criticized Carter for exaggerating the threat, believing Bitcoin will remain secure for at least 20 to 40 years. a16z reported that the likelihood of a computer capable of cracking modern cryptography appearing before 2030 is extremely low. Grayscale explicitly stated in its “2026 Digital Asset Outlook” that, although the quantum threat is real, it remains a “false alarm” for the 2026 market and will not affect short-term valuations.

Willy Woo, a long-term Bitcoin holder, and Deloitte both pointed out that P2PK addresses will be the most vulnerable, but added that newer Bitcoin address types are less susceptible because they do not expose the full public key on-chain.

Investors Should Know: Which Hibernating Computer Assets Are Most Vulnerable

For ordinary investors, the core question is simple: Are my assets safe?

The level of risk depends on how Bitcoin is stored and how long it has been held. Early Bitcoin addresses (such as Satoshi’s P2PK addresses) expose the full public key on-chain when spent, making assets stored in computer hibernation particularly vulnerable to quantum attacks. It is estimated that millions of such Bitcoin may be abandoned, worth hundreds of billions of dollars at the current $90K price.

But not all Bitcoin faces the same risk. Most ordinary users’ assets are not immediately at risk. If your address is of a modern type (like P2WPKH or P2TR), the public key is not exposed on-chain, and quantum computers cannot derive the corresponding private key. Conversely, long-term holders who haven’t moved their funds for over a decade, possibly using early address formats, face higher risks.

This also means that if the market crashes due to quantum fears, it could be a good opportunity for Bitcoin OGs to enter.

Public Chains Have Started Defensive Measures; Ethereum, Aptos, Solana Accelerate Deployment

Although the quantum storm has not yet arrived, public chains have already begun their defense.

In the Bitcoin community, in December last year, researchers Mikhail Kudinov and Jonas Nick from Blockstream published a revised paper proposing hash-based signature techniques as a key solution to protect the $1.8 trillion Bitcoin blockchain. This scheme has undergone extensive cryptanalysis during NIST’s post-quantum standardization process and is considered to have high robustness.

Ethereum has incorporated post-quantum cryptography (PQC) into its long-term roadmap, especially as a major goal during the Splurge phase. The strategy involves layered upgrades, using Layer 2 as a testing sandbox for anti-quantum algorithms, including lattice-based and hash-based cryptography. Recently, co-founder Vitalik Buterin warned that quantum computers could crack Ethereum’s elliptic curve encryption by 2028, urging the community to upgrade to quantum-resistant cryptography within four years.

Aptos announced a proposed improvement AIP-137, planning to support quantum-resistant digital signature schemes at the account level to address long-term risks from quantum computing. This optional scheme will not affect existing accounts and plans to support hash-based signatures standardized as FIPS 205, such as SLH-DSA.

Solana Foundation recently announced collaboration with post-quantum security firm Project Eleven to advance quantum-resistant deployment. Project Eleven has conducted comprehensive quantum threat assessments of the Solana ecosystem and successfully prototyped a testnet using post-quantum digital signatures, demonstrating the feasibility and scalability of end-to-end quantum-resistant transactions in real environments.

Cardano is adopting a gradual approach to quantum threats, such as establishing post-quantum checkpoints with the Mithril protocol, adding redundancy without affecting mainnet performance. Once hardware acceleration matures, post-quantum schemes—including VRF and signatures—will be gradually integrated into the main chain. This approach is like placing lifeboats on the deck first, then observing whether the storm truly forms.

Zcash has developed a quantum-recovery mechanism, allowing users to migrate old assets to more secure post-quantum modes.

Strategy co-founder Michael Saylor emphasizes that any protocol modifications should be extremely cautious. The lack of rapid change and frequent iterations in Bitcoin is actually an advantage. As the network upgrades, active Bitcoin will migrate to secure addresses, while those with lost private keys or unable to operate (including those locked by quantum computers) will be permanently frozen. This will effectively reduce Bitcoin’s supply and potentially increase its value.

Although the quantum crisis has not yet arrived, the pace of technological evolution is undeniable. Defense strategies are becoming a necessary challenge for crypto projects. Whether for dormant assets or blockchain ecosystem builders, the upcoming defense deployment will determine who can safely survive in the quantum era.