<p>First of all, Bitcoin is a decentralized protocol with no one in control. It doesn't and can't have any plans or roadmap, and any changes to it require consensus of its users.</p>
<p>With that out of the way, I don't think quantum computing is seen as an imminent threat. From what I could find, even optimistic predictions place practical quantum computing at least 10 years from now, and it's not a given it'll even ever be achieved.</p>
<p>On the other hand, quantum-resistant signature schemes use much larger public keys and/or signatures, which would seriously limit transaction throughput. According to a <a href="https://www.ledger.com/blog/should-crypto-fear-quantum-computing" rel="noreferrer">recent blog post from Ledger</a>, the state of the art PQC scheme uses 1563-byte signatures, more than 20 times larger than the signatures currently used in Bitcoin. Since this is an area of active research, I expect people will want to wait for more improvements before committing to adding a specific scheme to Bitcoin.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-03-06T19:24:51.793Z
2024-03-06T19:24:51.793Z
Vojtěch Strnad
<p>Satoshi Nakamoto was questioned on this in 2010 and had the following reply:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/forum/bitcoin-forum/173/#selection-25.0-25.45" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><code>Bitcoin Forum: Re: Major Meltdown July 10, 2010, 01:36:17 PM</code></a></p>
<p>Quote from user &quot;llama&quot;:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>However, if something happened and the signatures were compromised (perhaps integer factorization is solved, quantum
computers?), then even agreeing upon the last valid block would be
worthless.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Response by Satoshi Nakamoto</p>
<blockquote>
<p>True, if it happened suddenly.  If it happens gradually, we can still
transition to something stronger.  When you run the upgraded software
for the first time, it would re-sign all your money with the new
stronger signature algorithm.  (by creating a transaction sending the
money to yourself with the stronger sig)</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-03-06T19:40:49.383Z
2024-03-06T19:40:49.383Z
Lee
<p>There is a lot of discussion about quantum computing and how it will be able to crack wallet addresses. This could happen as early as 2025 says one source. Microsoft and other entities are working to secure their networks against quantum computers. I am curious to know if Bitcoin is addressing this issue?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-03-06T19:25:50.910Z
See also: [What would a bitcoin quantum resistant address look like?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/95428/121614)
Vojtěch Strnad
<quantum-computing>
Are there any plans to make Bitcoin quantum-resistant?
Jake Stanton
# Are there any plans to make Bitcoin quantum-resistant?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2024-03-06)

There is a lot of discussion about quantum computing and how it will be able to crack wallet addresses. This could happen as early as 2025 says one source. Microsoft and other entities are working to secure their networks against quantum computers. I am curious to know if Bitcoin is addressing this issue?

**Tags:** quantum-computing

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: See also: [What would a bitcoin quantum resistant address look like?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/95428/121614)  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2024-03-06. Score: 5

First of all, Bitcoin is a decentralized protocol with no one in control. It doesn't and can't have any plans or roadmap, and any changes to it require consensus of its users.

With that out of the way, I don't think quantum computing is seen as an imminent threat. From what I could find, even optimistic predictions place practical quantum computing at least 10 years from now, and it's not a given it'll even ever be achieved.

On the other hand, quantum-resistant signature schemes use much larger public keys and/or signatures, which would seriously limit transaction throughput. According to a [recent blog post from Ledger](https://www.ledger.com/blog/should-crypto-fear-quantum-computing), the state of the art PQC scheme uses 1563-byte signatures, more than 20 times larger than the signatures currently used in Bitcoin. Since this is an area of active research, I expect people will want to wait for more improvements before committing to adding a specific scheme to Bitcoin.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2024-03-06. Score: 1

Satoshi Nakamoto was questioned on this in 2010 and had the following reply:

[`Bitcoin Forum: Re: Major Meltdown July 10, 2010, 01:36:17 PM`](https://www.bitcoin.com/satoshi-archive/forum/bitcoin-forum/173/#selection-25.0-25.45)

Quote from user "llama":

> However, if something happened and the signatures were compromised (perhaps integer factorization is solved, quantum
> computers?), then even agreeing upon the last valid block would be
> worthless.

Response by Satoshi Nakamoto

> True, if it happened suddenly. If it happens gradually, we can still
> transition to something stronger. When you run the upgraded software
> for the first time, it would re-sign all your money with the new
> stronger signature algorithm. (by creating a transaction sending the
> money to yourself with the stronger sig)


---

