5 Years Left: Solana Co-Founder Urges Bitcoin Community To Brace For Quantum Threat

bitcoinistPublié le 2025-09-20Dernière mise à jour le 2025-09-20

Résumé

Bitcoin’s security may need an upgrade sooner than many expect, according to Anatoly Yakovenko, co-founder of Solana. Related Reading: China’s...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

Bitcoin’s security may need an upgrade sooner than many expect, according to Anatoly Yakovenko, co-founder of Solana.

Speaking at the All-In Summit 2025, Yakovenko warned there is roughly a 50/50 chance of a major quantum-computing breakthrough within the next five years and urged the Bitcoin community to start shifting to quantum-resistant signatures now.

Quantum Risk On A Short Timeline

According to reports, Yakovenko argued that advances in quantum hardware — helped along by rapid progress in AI — could reach a point where current cryptography used by Bitcoin becomes vulnerable by about 2030.

He recommended migrating away from Bitcoin’s existing signature scheme, ECDSA, toward algorithms designed to resist quantum attacks.

Bitcoin Uses Signatures That Could Be Targeted

Bitcoin transactions rely on ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm) to prove ownership.

Based on technical warnings from many researchers, a powerful enough quantum computer running algorithms such as Shor’s could, in theory, break those signatures and expose private keys tied to addresses that have revealed their public keys.

That is the vulnerability Yakovenko highlighted.

Experts Offer Mixed Timelines

Other voices in crypto put the timeline farther out. Reports show Adam Back of Blockstream thinks quantum machines that can threaten Bitcoin are likely decades away — he has cited a figure near 20 years.

Some figures, like Samson Mow, suggest a longer window as well, while newer commentators warn the risk could arrive much sooner if breakthroughs accelerate.

The split in views reflects real uncertainty about when — not whether — quantum will matter for blockchains.

BTCUSD trading at $115,989 on the 24-hour chart: TradingView

What A Fix Would Mean In Practice

Moving Bitcoin to quantum-resistant signatures is possible, but it is not small work. Based on analysis across industry pieces, such a shift could require major protocol changes, widespread wallet updates, and careful rollout plans to avoid breaking existing addresses or exposing users during the transition.

Some proposals include one-time migration tools and new address types, but none is a simple flip of a switch.

On Action And Urgency

Based on reports, Yakovenko’s main point was urgency: begin testing and building a migration path now, not later.

He noted Bitcoin’s strengths but stressed that preparation would protect users and preserve trust if quantum capabilities arrive faster than many expect.

Industry coverage has already circulated his remarks, prompting renewed discussion across developer forums and research groups.

What Happens Next

For now, Bitcoin developers and node operators face a choice between steady, cautious research and faster, coordinated engineering to prepare for several possible futures.

Yakovenko’s estimate — a 50/50 chance in five years — is far from a consensus, but it has pushed the debate back into public view.

Featured image from Meta, chart from TradingView

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Christian, a journalist and editor with leadership roles in Philippine and Canadian media, is fueled by his love for writing and cryptocurrency. Off-screen, he's a cook and cinephile who's constantly intrigued by the size of the universe.

Lectures associées

Vous serez surpris à quel point WeChat est différent de Telegram au niveau de l'architecture

L'audience mensuelle de WeChat et Weixin a atteint 1,428 milliard d'utilisateurs, confirmant son statut d'outil numérique central en Chine et au-delà. Cette analyse compare l'architecture de WeChat avec celle de Telegram, révélant des philosophies opposées en matière de stockage des données, de monétisation et d'ouverture aux développeurs. **Stockage des conversations :** Telegram utilise un stockage cloud illimité avec synchronisation sur tous les appareils. WeChat stocke les historiques localement sur l'appareil, nécessitant une fonction de migration spécifique pour les transférer et liant strictement la version desktop au téléphone. **Fonctionnalités sociales :** Dans Telegram, les commentaires sous les publications de chaînes sont intégrés. Dans WeChat, les commentaires sous les articles des comptes officiels sont modérés préalablement et ne disposent pas d'un système de discussion unifié. **Développement :** Telegram propose un Bot API ouvert et gratuit. L'écosystème des mini-programmes de WeChat est fermé, nécessitant souvent une vérification et une certification payante pour les développeurs. **Transfert de fichiers :** Telegram permet d'envoyer des fichiers jusqu'à 2 Go (4 Go pour Premium). WeChat limite généralement les envois à 200 Mo, proposant un "assistant de transfert" pour les volumes plus importants. **Paiements :** WeChat Pay est profondément intégré dans la vie économique chinoise, remplaçant souvent les applications bancaires. Telegram ne possède pas de système de paiement fiduciaire intégré comparable, s'appuyant sur des bots tiers et les cryptomonnaies. **Analyse de la sécurité (point de vue IA ajouté) :** L'article soulève indirectement la question de la sécurité. Telegram propose un chiffrement de bout en bout pour ses "chats secrets". WeChat, sans chiffrement de bout en bout standard, fusionne messages et paiements dans une même interface, ce qui pourrait élargir la surface d'attaque en cas de vulnérabilité, comme l'illustrent des cas de fraude signalés à Singapour. En conclusion, WeChat repose sur un modèle intégré et fermé, profondément ancré dans l'économie réelle, tandis que Telegram privilégie les protocoles ouverts, le stockage flexible et une faible barrière à l'entrée pour les développeurs. Ce choix architectural fondamental détermine leurs publics et leurs cas d'utilisation respectifs.

cryptonews.ruIl y a 2 h

Vous serez surpris à quel point WeChat est différent de Telegram au niveau de l'architecture

cryptonews.ruIl y a 2 h

Trading

Spot
活动图片