Bitcoin Developers Kick Off Quantum-Safety Track With BIP-360

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-02-13Last updated on 2026-02-13

Abstract

Bitcoin developers have advanced quantum-resistance efforts by merging an updated draft of BIP-360 into the official repository. The proposal introduces Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR), a new SegWit v2 output type that removes Taproot’s key-path spend—deemed most vulnerable to quantum attacks—while retaining script-tree functionality. P2MR addresses long-exposure quantum risks, where public keys remain on-chain for extended periods, but does not protect against short-exposure attacks targeting unconfirmed transactions. As a soft fork, it creates a new address type (bc1z) without affecting existing Taproot outputs. Trade-offs include larger witness sizes and reduced privacy, as all spends reveal script usage. The proposal marks a concrete step in formalizing quantum-preparedness, though future work on post-quantum signatures may be needed.

Bitcoin’s quantum-security discussion just gained a concrete new artifact in the code-and-spec pipeline: an updated draft of BIP-360 has been merged into the official Bitcoin Improvement Proposals repository, proposing a Taproot-adjacent output type designed to limit exposure to future quantum key-recovery attacks.

The change matters less because it “solves” quantum risk today, and more because it formalizes a specific, opt-in path that preserves Taproot’s script-tree functionality while removing the spending route considered most problematic under a quantum-threat model.

Bitcoin Devs Make First Formal Quantum-Resistance Move

Anduro, a research-focused platform incubated by Marathon Digital (MARA), said on X that the merged update “introduces Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR), a proposed new output type that omits Taproot’s quantum-vulnerable key-path spend while preserving compatibility with Tapscript and script trees.”

In BIP terms, the proposal is scoped as “Consensus (soft fork)” and defines P2MR as a new SegWit v2 output that commits directly to the Merkle root of a script tree, rather than to a tweaked public key as in Pay-to-Taproot (P2TR). The practical implication is straightforward: P2MR outputs can only be spent via script-path logic; the key-path spend is removed entirely.

The BIP’s abstract frames the goal in terms of minimizing changes while providing an option set for users who want additional protection:

“This document proposes a new output type: Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR), via a soft fork. P2MR outputs operate with nearly the same functionality as P2TR (Pay-to-Taproot) outputs, but with the key path spend removed.”
It adds that the intended protection is against “long exposure attacks by Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computers (CRQCs),” as well as “future cryptanalytic approaches that may compromise the elliptic curve cryptography (ECC) used by Bitcoin.”

A key element of the BIP is definitional discipline: it distinguishes “long exposure” attacks (where public keys are available on-chain for extended periods) from “short exposure” attacks, which would target public keys revealed briefly in the mempool during an unconfirmed spend.

The document is explicit that P2MR is not a complete quantum shield. “It is worth noting that proposed P2MR outputs are only resistant to ‘long exposure attacks’ on elliptic curve cryptography; that is, attacks on keys exposed for time periods longer than needed to confirm a spending transaction,” the BIP states.

“Protection against more sophisticated quantum attacks, including protection against private key recovery from public keys exposed in the mempool while a transaction is waiting to be confirmed (a.k.a. ‘short exposure attacks’), may require the introduction of post-quantum signatures in Bitcoin.” The authors add they “intend to offer a separate proposal for this purpose upon further research.”

That split is also why the proposal emphasizes tapscript compatibility. It positions P2MR as a script-tree output type that could, if Bitcoin ever adopts post-quantum signature opcodes, provide a cleaner upgrade runway than older script mechanisms that don’t support tapscript’s evolution path.

Anduro highlighted that the change is designed as a soft fork and “does not affect existing Taproot outputs.” P2MR would be a new output type (with bech32m addresses starting with bc1z) rather than a retrofit of existing bc1p Taproot UTXOs.

The proposal also doesn’t pretend the swap is free. By removing key-path spends, P2MR gives up Taproot’s most compact witness path (a single Schnorr signature). The BIP estimates that a minimal P2MR spend witness is 37 bytes larger than a Taproot key-path spend, though it can be smaller than an equivalent Taproot script-path spend because P2MR’s control block omits an internal public key.

Privacy shifts too. Because every spend is script-path, P2MR users necessarily reveal they are spending from a script tree—something Taproot key-path spends can avoid signaling.

Anduro said the update also “addresses criticism about Bitcoin devs not taking the quantum threat seriously,” and noted the addition of Isabel Foxen Duke as co-author to make the BIP clearer “to the general public, not just the Bitcoin developer community.”

BIP-360 remains in “Draft” status. But its merge into the canonical repository is still a meaningful process marker: it moves the quantum-safety conversation from abstract worry and mailing-list hypotheticals toward a specific consensus change proposal that wallets, libraries, and reviewers can now analyze line-by-line.

If the debate has a next phase, it’s likely to center on whether “prepared not scared” opt-ins like P2MR are sufficient groundwork or whether Bitcoin will eventually need to grapple directly with post-quantum signatures and the operational realities of migrating value at scale.

At press time, BTC traded at $66,558.

Bitcoin must reclaim the 200-week EMA, 1-week chart | Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView.com

Trending Cryptos

Related Questions

QWhat is the main purpose of the newly proposed BIP-360 update?

AThe main purpose of BIP-360 is to propose a new output type called Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR), which removes the quantum-vulnerable key-path spend from Taproot while preserving compatibility with Tapscript and script trees, offering protection against long exposure quantum threats.

QHow does the Pay-to-Merkle-Root (P2MR) output type differ from Pay-to-Taproot (P2TR)?

AP2MR commits directly to the Merkle root of a script tree, removing the key-path spend entirely, whereas P2TR commits to a tweaked public key and allows for both key-path and script-path spends.

QWhat specific quantum threat does P2MR aim to protect against, and what does it not protect against?

AP2MR aims to protect against 'long exposure attacks' where public keys are exposed on-chain for extended periods. It does not protect against 'short exposure attacks' where keys are briefly revealed in the mempool, which would require post-quantum signatures.

QWhat are some trade-offs of using P2MR outputs compared to Taproot?

AP2MR gives up Taproot's most compact witness path, resulting in a minimal spend witness that is 37 bytes larger. It also reduces privacy because every spend reveals the use of a script tree, unlike Taproot key-path spends which can avoid signaling.

QWhat is the current status of BIP-360 and why is its merge into the repository significant?

ABIP-360 is in 'Draft' status. Its merge into the official Bitcoin Improvement Proposals repository is significant because it moves the quantum-safety discussion from abstract concerns to a specific, analyzable consensus change proposal for the community.

Related Reads

Now the Greatest Regret Is to My Family: Crypto Experts Took a Stumble in the Stock Market

Summary: This article examines the significant losses recently suffered by cryptocurrency traders and influencers who ventured into the stock market, specifically by heavily investing in AI-related and semiconductor storage stocks. The narrative centers on the dramatic reversal in the Korean and US equity markets in late July, with stocks like SK Hynix and related leveraged ETFs experiencing historic plunges, erasing massive gains. The analysis highlights several key factors behind the "flip." Traders, accustomed to crypto's high volatility and frustrated by a stagnant market, chased the apparent momentum in AI-themed equities. Many made fatal mistakes: applying high-leverage strategies common in crypto (e.g., 2x ETFs, on-chain perpetual contracts) to stocks, and failing to understand the distinct rules of different stock markets (like Korean pre-market trading). This led to widespread liquidations, especially when a thin Korean pre-market trade triggered a cascading flash crash on a decentralized exchange. Post-crash reflections from prominent figures reveal deep regret and self-criticism. They acknowledge misjudging their expertise, overestimating their edge against sophisticated institutional players, and the dangers of leverage. The article concludes that while such setbacks are part of trading, surviving long-term requires recognizing one's limitations and the inherent risks of cross-market strategies.

marsbit35m ago

Now the Greatest Regret Is to My Family: Crypto Experts Took a Stumble in the Stock Market

marsbit35m ago

US Senate Makes Important Amendments to "Conflict of Interest" Section of Cryptocurrency Bill

The U.S. Senate has taken a key step regarding the CLARITY Act, which could shape the future of the U.S. crypto market. On July 29, Senators Tom Tillis and Ruben Gallego finalized amendments to the bill's "conflict of interest" rules, one of its most contentious aspects. The bipartisan bill aims to tighten restrictions on high-level federal officials' ties to digital assets. The new text, crafted as an alternative to a White House-endorsed ethics code, is expected to impose stricter rules limiting officials' ability to issue or directly participate in digital asset projects. However, with Congress entering an August recess and the revised text not yet reviewed by much of the Senate, the bill's timeline is uncertain. Senate Majority Leader John Thune indicated a procedural vote could occur between July 29 and August 1 but expressed doubt the full bill could pass before the break. The House-approved CLARITY Act, passed in July 2025, has been under Senate negotiation for over a year. Key goals of the CLARITY Act include clarifying jurisdictional boundaries between the SEC and CFTC, setting rules for digital commodity spot markets, and addressing topics like stablecoin yields, DeFi, and illicit financing. The stablecoin yield provisions could significantly impact U.S.-based DeFi protocols, exchanges, and issuers, affecting their global competitiveness. The outcome is being closely watched by both the U.S. and global digital asset markets.

cryptonews.ru1h ago

US Senate Makes Important Amendments to "Conflict of Interest" Section of Cryptocurrency Bill

cryptonews.ru1h ago

Pavel Durov Designated as a Terrorist in Russia. What Does This Mean for Telegram Users?

Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram, has been added to Russia's list of terrorists and extremists by Rosfinmonitoring, as published on July 30. The entry includes his name and date of birth. The designation follows an announcement by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) on July 29, which charged Durov with aiding terrorist activity. The FSB alleges that a Telegram dating bot named "DaiVinchik" was used to recruit 46 individuals for attacks on police and arson, orchestrated by Ukrainian special services. The FSB also accuses Telegram's administration of failing to remove channels and bots used by Ukrainian intelligence and extremist groups. Durov is reportedly subject to an international arrest warrant. Inclusion on the Rosfinmonitoring list leads to significant restrictions: the freezing of Durov's bank accounts and assets, severe limitations on financial transactions, and a ban on election participation, media interaction, and event organization. Transfers to his accounts may be considered terrorism financing. For ordinary Russian Telegram users, purchasing Telegram Premium is not classified as financing terrorism, according to an IT expert. General use of the messenger—messaging, managing channels—does not automatically make a user a participant in extremist activity. There has been no official decision to ban Telegram itself. It is noted that French authorities are also investigating Durov over allegations of inadequate measures against criminal activity on the platform and insufficient cooperation with law enforcement. Durov denies all charges.

cryptonews.ru1h ago

Pavel Durov Designated as a Terrorist in Russia. What Does This Mean for Telegram Users?

cryptonews.ru1h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

What is $BITCOIN

DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): A Comprehensive Analysis Introduction to DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a blockchain-based project operating on the Solana network, which aims to combine the characteristics of traditional precious metals with the innovation of decentralized technologies. While it shares a name with Bitcoin, often referred to as “digital gold” due to its perception as a store of value, DIGITAL GOLD is a separate token designed to create a unique ecosystem within the Web3 landscape. Its goal is to position itself as a viable alternative digital asset, although specifics regarding its applications and functionalities are still developing. What is DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) is a cryptocurrency token explicitly designed for use on the Solana blockchain. In contrast to Bitcoin, which provides a widely recognized value storage role, this token appears to focus on broader applications and characteristics. Notable aspects include: Blockchain Infrastructure: The token is built on the Solana blockchain, known for its capacity to handle high-speed and low-cost transactions. Supply Dynamics: DIGITAL GOLD has a maximum supply capped at 100 quadrillion tokens (100P $BITCOIN), although details regarding its circulating supply are currently undisclosed. Utility: While precise functionalities are not explicitly outlined, there are indications that the token could be utilized for various applications, potentially involving decentralized applications (dApps) or asset tokenization strategies. Who is the Creator of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? At present, the identity of the creators and development team behind DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) remains unknown. This situation is typical among many innovative projects within the blockchain space, particularly those aligning with decentralized finance and meme coin phenomena. While such anonymity may foster a community-driven culture, it intensifies concerns about governance and accountability. Who are the Investors of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN)? The available information indicates that DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) does not have any known institutional backers or prominent venture capital investments. The project seems to operate on a peer-to-peer model focused on community support and adoption rather than traditional funding routes. Its activity and liquidity are primarily situated on decentralized exchanges (DEXs), such as PumpSwap, rather than established centralized trading platforms, further highlighting its grassroots approach. How DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) Works The operational mechanics of DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) can be elaborated on based on its blockchain design and network attributes: Consensus Mechanism: By leveraging Solana’s unique proof-of-history (PoH) combined with a proof-of-stake (PoS) model, the project ensures efficient transaction validation contributing to the network's high performance. Tokenomics: While specific deflationary mechanisms have not been extensively detailed, the vast maximum token supply implies that it may cater to microtransactions or niche use cases that are still to be defined. Interoperability: There exists the potential for integration with Solana’s broader ecosystem, including various decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms. However, the details regarding specific integrations remain unspecified. Timeline of Key Events Here is a timeline that highlights significant milestones concerning DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN): 2023: The initial deployment of the token occurs on the Solana blockchain, marked by its contract address. 2024: DIGITAL GOLD gains visibility as it becomes available for trading on decentralized exchanges like PumpSwap, allowing users to trade it against SOL. 2025: The project witnesses sporadic trading activity and potential interest in community-led engagements, although no noteworthy partnerships or technical advancements have been documented as of yet. Critical Analysis Strengths Scalability: The underlying Solana infrastructure supports high transaction volumes, which could enhance the utility of $BITCOIN in various transaction scenarios. Accessibility: The potential low trading price per token could attract retail investors, facilitating wider participation due to fractional ownership opportunities. Risks Lack of Transparency: The absence of publicly known backers, developers, or an audit process may yield skepticism regarding the project's sustainability and trustworthiness. Market Volatility: The trading activity is heavily reliant on speculative behavior, which can result in significant price volatility and uncertainty for investors. Conclusion DIGITAL GOLD ($BITCOIN) emerges as an intriguing yet ambiguous project within the rapidly evolving Solana ecosystem. While it attempts to leverage the “digital gold” narrative, its departure from Bitcoin's established role as a store of value underscores the need for a clearer differentiation of its intended utility and governance structure. Future acceptance and adoption will likely depend on addressing the current opacity and defining its operational and economic strategies more explicitly. Note: This report encompasses synthesised information available as of October 2023, and developments may have transpired beyond the research period.

1.1k Total ViewsPublished 2025.05.13Updated 2025.05.13

What is $BITCOIN

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of BTC (BTC) are presented below.

活动图片