Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Bitcoin’s quantum threat is real, but far from an existential crisis, Galaxy says

Published

on

Bitcoin’s quantum threat is real, but far from an existential crisis, Galaxy says

Fears that quantum computing could one day break Bitcoin’s cryptography have sparked a heated debate across the crypto industry.

But according to Alex Thorn, head of research at Galaxy Digital (GLXY), the narrative that Bitcoin is unprepared, or that investors should avoid exposure because of it, is overstated.

The risk itself is not imaginary. A sufficiently advanced quantum computer could, in theory, derive private keys from exposed public keys, allowing an attacker to forge signatures and steal funds. But Thorn argues that framing this as an imminent or uniquely Bitcoin-specific crisis misses critical context, both about the technology and about the work already underway to address it.

“The risk is real but recognized,” Thorn told CoinDesk in an interview. “And the people best positioned to solve it are actively working on it.”

Advertisement

Quantum computing is a fundamentally different approach to computation that uses the principles of quantum mechanics rather than classical physics. Instead of traditional bits that are either 0 or 1, quantum computers use “qubits,” which can exist in multiple states at once, a property known as superposition, allowing them to process many possibilities simultaneously.

Combined with another feature called entanglement, this enables quantum machines to solve certain complex problems far more efficiently than classical computers, particularly tasks like factoring large numbers that underpin modern encryption

Analysis from Project Eleven, a security firm focused on quantum risks in digital assets, suggests that roughly 7 million bitcoin , worth about $470 billion at recent prices, could be vulnerable under a “long exposure” definition, meaning their public keys have already been revealed onchain. Other estimates vary widely depending on how exposure is defined.

Importantly, most bitcoin today is not immediately vulnerable. Funds are only at risk in scenarios where public keys are exposed onchain, either because users reused addresses, certain custodians employ operational shortcuts, or coins sit in older address formats. While some estimates suggest millions of BTC fall into these categories, they remain secure under current, publicly known quantum capabilities.

Advertisement

That distinction is central to Galaxy’s argument. The conversation has become polarized between those who dismiss quantum computing as decades away and those who warn of imminent danger. Thorn’s view lands in between. The probability of a future threat is meaningful enough to warrant action, but not so urgent that it outpaces Bitcoin’s ability to respond.

And that response is already underway.

A growing body of technical work is focused on making Bitcoin “quantum-resistant” over time. One of the most prominent efforts involves introducing new address types that rely on post-quantum cryptography. These would allow users to migrate funds away from potentially vulnerable formats, significantly reducing long-term exposure.

“There’s a lot more work being done than people realize,” Thorn said. “Developers are actively building pathways to upgrade the system.”

Advertisement

Other proposals tackle edge cases, such as dormant coins with permanently exposed public keys. One idea, sometimes referred to as an “hourglass” approach, would gradually restrict how such coins can be spent, mitigating systemic risk without outright confiscation or disruption.

More broadly, developers are exploring phased upgrade paths that would allow Bitcoin to adapt even under more extreme scenarios, such as a world where quantum systems can rapidly break existing cryptographic schemes. That could include changes to how transactions reveal public keys in the first place, limiting attack surfaces altogether.

While these efforts are complex, both technically and from a governance standpoint, Thorn emphasizes that Bitcoin’s open development model is a strength, not a weakness. The ecosystem has time, talent, and strong incentives to solve the problem well before it becomes critical.

Crucially, the number of actors capable of triggering a so-called “Q-day,” when quantum computers can break modern cryptography, is still extremely limited. Even optimistic projections suggest only a small group of highly specialized researchers could achieve such a breakthrough in the foreseeable future.

Advertisement

Against that backdrop, Thorn views the growing wave of quantum-related fear, uncertainty, and doubt as disproportionate.

“Quantum computing is a powerful, potentially disruptive technology, but that doesn’t mean every risk is immediate or unmanageable,” he said.

For investors, the takeaway is straightforward. Quantum risk should be monitored, but not used as a blanket justification to avoid bitcoin exposure. The network has a track record of evolving in response to credible threats, and the groundwork for quantum resilience is already being laid.

“It’s not certain that quantum is an existential issue for bitcoin, but the chance that it is justifies concern,” Thorn said. “But what’s clear today is that Bitcoin developers are not ignoring it. Instead, many are actively working on it,” he added.

Advertisement

Read more: Cathie Wood’s Ark Invest says quantum computing is a long-term risk for bitcoin, not an imminent threat

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Bittensor price outlook: consolidation or deeper correction?

Published

on

Bittensor price outlook
Bittensor price outlook
  • Bittensor price is trapped between key support and strong resistance levels.
  • Momentum is cooling, hinting at either consolidation or a drop.
  • A break above $300 or below $250 will decide the next major move.

Bittensor (TAO) had shown strong bullish movement for the better part of the year before hitting a snag on March 16.

That rejection triggered a sharp pullback that erased part of the recent gains.

The cryptocurrency has now entered a tense phase, with analysts trying to determine whether the current weakness is a healthy pause or the start of a deeper decline.

Key technical levels shaping the market

Bittensor is currently trading within a well-defined range that has formed over recent price swings.

The upper boundary sits near the $282 to $300 zone, where multiple attempts to break higher have failed.

Advertisement

This area has consistently acted as a ceiling and has attracted strong selling pressure.

A clean move above $282 would shift the market sentiment quickly, signalling renewed strength and possibly opening the path toward $313.

Beyond that, $357 remains a longer-term target if momentum continues to build.

Bittensor price analysis
Bittensor price chart | Source: TradingView

On the downside, the market has shown repeated reactions around the $250 region.

This level aligns closely with a key Fibonacci retracement zone and has become a critical support area.

Advertisement

Below that, analysts note that $168 stands out as another important level where buyers have previously stepped in.

Accumulation or correction?

The current structure presents two clear possibilities. The first is a controlled pullback that leads into accumulation.

In this scenario, the price stabilises between $230 and $250 as larger participants gradually build positions.

This type of behaviour often appears after strong rallies and helps reset momentum.

Advertisement

The second scenario is a deeper correction that extends below current support levels.

This would indicate that selling pressure is stronger than expected and that buyers are not yet ready to defend higher prices.

A breakdown below $233 would strengthen this view and likely accelerate downside movement.

Market indicators currently suggest that momentum is cooling, with the Relative Strength Index (RSI) moving down from overbought levels, signalling a loss of upward pressure.

Advertisement

While this does not confirm a trend reversal on its own, it does suggest caution in the short term.

The bigger picture

Despite the recent weakness, Bittensor continues to stand out due to its underlying purpose.

The network is built around rewarding useful artificial intelligence, creating a system where performance determines value.

This gives the project a foundation that is different from many speculative assets.

Advertisement

Price action often moves ahead of fundamentals, and this appears to be one of those moments.

The market is currently adjusting after a strong run, and this adjustment could take time.

However, whether this turns into accumulation or further decline will depend on how the price behaves around key levels in the coming days.

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

OP_NET Launches “SlowFi” DeFi Stack Directly on Bitcoin L1

Published

on

OP_NET Launches “SlowFi” DeFi Stack Directly on Bitcoin L1

OP_NET said it is launching a “SlowFi” decentralized finance (DeFi) stack on Bitcoin that uses standard Bitcoin transactions and native BTC fees rather than bridges, wrapped assets or a separate gas token.

According to a Thursday release shared with Cointelegraph, the project is part of a broader push to bring trading and yield-style activity directly onto Bitcoin’s base layer instead of routing it through sidechains, bridges or adjacent networks. OP_NET is betting some users will accept slower and more expensive transactions in exchange for staying fully on Bitcoin.

According to OP_NET co-founder Frederic Fosco, who goes by Danny Plainview, applications run through standard Bitcoin (BTC) transactions using Taproot-based spends, while the platform’s NativeSwap model is designed to support token swaps without wrapped BTC or a separate gas asset. Plainview told Cointelegraph that every transaction on OP_NET is “just a Bitcoin transaction with BTC as the only gas asset.”

The launch lands in the middle of a growing fight inside Bitcoin over whether DeFi-style and data-heavy uses of block space strengthen the network’s fee market or amount to spam that crowds out monetary transactions.

Advertisement

Plainview said a swap would typically cost about $1 to $2 under normal fee conditions and roughly $10 to $20 when blocks are congested, because users pay only standard Bitcoin network fees rather than a separate gas token.

OP_NET cofounder Frederic Fosco, AKA Danny Plainview. Source: OP_NET

OP_NET describes the model as “SlowFi,” arguing that Bitcoin’s roughly 10-minute block times and congestion-driven exit friction can make liquidity stickier and produce longer-lived DeFi cycles than faster chains.

Related: Fireblocks to integrate Stacks for institutional-grade Bitcoin DeFi

Critics say OP_NET brings Ethereum-style DeFi bloat

Plainview framed layer-1 DeFi as a way to support miner revenue as block subsidies decline, arguing that “miners are bleeding” due to Bitcoin’s halving schedule. “The only thing that keeps miners solvent is a fee market,” he said, insisting that OP_NET does not modify Bitcoin consensus.

Related: Animoca, RootstockLabs partner to bring Bitcoin DeFi to Japanese institutions

Advertisement

That view has drawn criticism from Bitcoin users who argue that pushing DeFi-style activity onto layer 1 dilutes Bitcoin’s monetary focus or clogs block space with nonessential transactions. In recent posts on X, some critics described OP_NET as an attempt to bring Ethereum-style crypto infrastructure onto Bitcoin.

Some maximalists argued that any attempt to expand Bitcoin’s use cases beyond money made its proponents “sh*tcoiners” larping as Bitcoiners.

BIP 110 proponents argue against OP_NET. Source: Justin Bechler

Plainview pushed back, saying that any fee-paying Taproot transaction should be treated as a legitimate use of block space.

He warned that drawing moral lines around valid transactions handed de facto control of Bitcoin to whoever defines those categories. He said:

“The whole point is that nobody controls it.”

OP_NET keeps DeFi on Bitcoin base layer

OP_NET enters a field already populated by earlier attempts to bring programmability to Bitcoin, including through RSK and Stacks. 

Advertisement

RSK operates as a separate Ethereum Virtual Machine-compatible sidechain with its own RBTC gas token and a federated BTC peg, meaning users move value off mainnet and trust a federation to manage the bridge. 

Stacks, by contrast, is a Bitcoin-anchored layer-2 with its own STX token and sBTC mechanism, executing smart contracts on a distinct chain that settles periodically to Bitcoin rather than inside L1 transactions.

By keeping execution and fees directly on Bitcoin and avoiding wrapped BTC or new gas assets, Plainview is betting that some users will accept slower, more expensive transactions in exchange for staying entirely on Bitcoin’s base layer.

Magazine: Bitcoin may take 7 years to upgrade to post-quantum — BIP-360 co-author

Advertisement