Bitcoiners have long theorized the sort of black swan events that could cripple the cryptocurrency network, rendering it unusable. Scenarios postulated range from nuclear apocalypse to a catastrophic internet failure – either of which would of course affect humanity in much more tangible ways than merely their ability to transact onchain.

One of the greatest threats envisaged, and which is now being routinely discussed, concerns the specter of quantum computing. Once sufficiently powerful quantum machines arrive, doomsdayers warn, cryptography could collapse overnight, affecting not just Bitcoin but most blockchains as well as traditional banking and web security.

The reason why this fear has gained mindshare, while other black swans – alien technology, say, or Satoshi’s 1M dormant bitcoins being reactivated – haven’t is because the quantum threat has a realistic chance of materializing. Indeed, many would say it’s inevitable and that it’s just a question of when it arrives.

Are we talking years or decades? If it’s the latter, there’s ample time for the world to migrate to quantum-proof systems. If it’s the former, then Houston we have a problem. Which is why it makes sense to head it off now so that when that day arrives, the world is ready and has implemented solutions to prevent digital assets and the distributed ledgers on which they run from being compromised.

As a result, researchers are increasingly paying attention to cryptographic systems that are quantum-resistant, ensuring they remain secure even in a world where quantum computers exist. Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE) falls firmly into this category, which is one of the primary reasons why it’s attracting growing interest across Web3 and traditional computing.

To understand why, we need to unpack the quantum threat and examine how FHE’s underlying mathematics differ from the cryptography most blockchains rely on today.

The Quantum Computing Problem

Most people don’t understand quantum computing at a deep level, which is unsurprising given its complexity. But they do understand the significance of the threat it presents. As you’re likely aware, traditional computers process information as bits that exist in one of two states, 0 or 1. Quantum computers use quantum bits, or qubits, which can exist in multiple states simultaneously thanks to a property known as superposition.

Without going too far down the physics rabbit hole, the practical implication is that certain problems which would take classical computers thousands or millions of years to solve can theoretically be solved far faster on a quantum machine. This matters because many widely used encryption systems depend on mathematical problems that are easy to compute in one direction but extremely difficult to reverse.

Two of the most important examples are RSA encryption, which relies on the difficulty of factoring large prime numbers, and Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC), which relies on the difficulty of solving discrete logarithm problems. Both of these are vulnerable to a quantum algorithm known as Shor’s Algorithm, which can efficiently solve the mathematical problems that secure them, and ECC is particularly relevant to blockchain because it forms the backbone of most crypto wallet security.

Why Blockchain Could Be Vulnerable

In most blockchain networks, control of funds ultimately comes down to possession of a private key. When you send a transaction, the network verifies that you own that key by checking a digital signature derived from elliptic curve cryptography. Under classical computing assumptions, deriving the private key from the public key is computationally infeasible.

But with sufficiently powerful quantum hardware running Shor’s Algorithm, that equation changes. A quantum attacker could theoretically derive the private key from the public key, allowing them to forge signatures and potentially drain wallets.

This doesn’t necessarily mean the threat is imminent. Current quantum computers remain far too small and error-prone to perform these attacks at scale. But cryptography operates on long time horizons and assets stored on a blockchain today need to remain secure decades into the future – which brings us back to FHE.

Why FHE is naturally Quantum-Resistant

Fully Homomorphic Encryption is built differently. That’s because most modern FHE implementations rely on lattice-based cryptography, which is based on the difficulty of solving problems involving high-dimensional geometric structures called lattices.

In simple terms, the challenge involves solving large systems of equations that include small amounts of noise or randomness. For classical computers, solving these problems efficiently is extremely difficult and – critically – no known quantum algorithms can solve them dramatically faster.

This makes lattice-based systems among the leading candidates for post-quantum cryptography, and organizations such as the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have selected several lattice-based algorithms as future cryptographic standards.

Because most FHE schemes are built on these same mathematical foundations, they inherit the same resistance to quantum attacks. In other words, FHE wasn’t originally designed as a quantum defense mechanism but the mathematics it relies on happens to align with the direction post-quantum cryptography is moving.

What this means for Blockchain

Quantum resistance is particularly important for blockchain systems because they’re designed to be enduring infra. We don’t know what one bitcoin will be worth in 20 years, but we’d like to have the confidence that it will be worth something and thus worth holding as a long-term investment – as well as ultimately bequeathing to our descendants.

Which is another reason why it’s important to be thinking about quantum computing now. It’s also worth noting, at this juncture, that blockchains can’t simply swap out cryptographic systems overnight. Their security assumptions are embedded into everything from consensus mechanisms to wallet architecture.

If a widely used cryptographic primitive becomes vulnerable, migrating an entire blockchain ecosystem would be – as Bane would put it – extremely painful. This is why the industry has begun circling FHE.

Because it allows computation on encrypted data and relies on quantum-resistant mathematics, FHE offers a pathway to privacy-preserving blockchain systems that are also post-quantum secure. This is particularly relevant for applications involving sensitive financial data.

The role of FHE in private DeFi

One of the most promising uses of FHE in blockchain today is encrypted decentralized finance. Public blockchains are of course transparent by design, and while this transparency is valuable for verification, it creates problems in financial markets where strategies and wallet balances become visible to everyone.

Fully Homomorphic Encryption addresses this by allowing smart contracts to operate on encrypted balances. For example, a lending protocol can verify that a borrower has enough collateral to secure a loan without revealing the exact amount and liquidation thresholds can remain hidden, preventing traders from targeting vulnerable positions. Encrypted lending models built on FHE demonstrate how smart contracts can enforce financial rules while keeping sensitive information private.

In this context, FHE delivers two benefits simultaneously: privacy coupled with long-term cryptographic resilience.

A future-proof cryptographic model

The rise of quantum computing has forced cryptographers to rethink the assumptions underpinning modern security. It seems inevitable that technologies built around classical cryptographic primitives may eventually need to be replaced. It could happen slowly or it could occur overnight due to a sudden quantum computing breakthrough.

What matters is that when it does happen, we’re prepped and ready rather than scrambling around for a solution – by which point it may be too late. We don’t know how long the pre-quantum era will last. But we do know that every age eventually comes to pass and when the pre-quantum one does, the blockchains that are protected by Fully Homomorphic Encryption will be spared and their security guarantees unimpaired.

In the here and now, FHE is useful for many things including delivering onchain privacy. But someway down the line, its primary value may be as the defense that ensures blockchain remains immune to the onslaught of the most powerful computers ever conceived.

Nvidia now faces a certified investor class in a long-running securities case tied to the 2017-2018 crypto mining boom. 

A California federal judge ruled on March 25 that shareholders who bought Nvidia stock during a defined period can pursue their claims together, while the case moves into its next stage.

US District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. certified a class covering investors who acquired Nvidia common stock from August 10, 2017, through November 15, 2018. The ruling focused on whether the alleged statements may have affected Nvidia’s share price, which is a key issue in class certification.

The order does not decide whether Nvidia or Chief Executive Jensen Huang committed fraud. It allows investors to press the case together instead of filing separate lawsuits.

Investors allege that Nvidia and Huang misled the market about how much gaming revenue came from GPU sales tied to cryptocurrency miners. Current reporting says the plaintiffs claim Nvidia concealed more than $1 billion in crypto-related GPU sales during that period.

The complaint links the case to two market reactions in 2018. Court filings cited in the Supreme Court record say Nvidia stock fell 4.9% after the company’s August 16, 2018 earnings update, and then dropped 28.5% over two trading days after its November 15, 2018 revenue warning.

Moreover, the dispute has already survived several legal tests. In December 2024, the US Supreme Court dismissed Nvidia’s appeal and left in place a lower court ruling that allowed the shareholder suit to continue.

The case also follows Nvidia’s 2022 settlement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC said Nvidia failed to give investors proper disclosure about the effect of cryptomining on its gaming business, and the company agreed to a cease-and-desist order and a $5.5 million penalty without admitting or denying the findings.

Nvidia prepares for the next stage

Nvidia has continued to reject the claims. After the Supreme Court decision in 2024, a company spokesperson said Nvidia was “fully prepared to continue our defense,” while maintaining that clear standards in securities litigation matter for shareholders and the market.

The court has scheduled a case conference for April 21, 2026, as the lawsuit moves forward after class certification. With that step complete, the case now shifts from the fight over procedure to the evidence that investors and Nvidia will present in court.

Tazapay has extended its Series B funding round and raised total capital to $36 million. The new funding comes as stablecoin-based payment infrastructure continues to attract backing from crypto and fintech investors focused on faster cross-border settlement.

Tazapay said Circle Ventures led the extension round. Coinbase Ventures, CMT Digital, Peak XV Partners, and Ripple also joined the funding.

The company said the new capital will support its digital settlement technology for cross-border payments. It also plans to use the funds to secure more licenses and expand operations in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and the Americas.

Tazapay said it now serves more than 1,000 enterprises and fintechs across 30 countries. The company also said it already holds licenses in Singapore, Canada, Australia, and the United States.

It added that license applications are active in the European Union, the United Arab Emirates, and Hong Kong. This part of the plan shows that the company is focusing on regulated markets as it expands its payment network.

Chief business officer Kanupriya Sharda said demand remains strong across several regions. She said, 

“The demand we’re seeing from enterprises and fintechs across Asia, LATAM, and the Middle East is unmistakable; businesses want to move money faster, cheaper, and with full regulatory confidence.”

Tazapay also said part of the funding will go toward infrastructure for “agentic payments.” The company did not give full details in the announcement, but it placed that product area alongside its broader settlement and licensing strategy.

Stablecoin payment firms continue to draw investor support

The Tazapay round comes as more firms build stablecoin and fiat payment rails for banks, fintechs, and global businesses. Investors have continued to fund platforms that promise faster transfers and lower cross-border payment costs.

Earlier this month, Ripple said Ripple Payments had expanded into an end-to-end stablecoin and fiat platform. Ripple said the service is live in more than 60 markets and has processed over $100 billion in volume.

In May 2025, cross-border payments firm Conduit raised $36 million in a Series A round. The company said it would use the capital to scale its payment system and expand fiat and stablecoin offerings.

Conduit has promoted its network as an alternative to SWIFT for international money movement. Tazapay’s latest raise now places it among the firms building the next wave of cross-border payment infrastructure.

US Representative Maxine Waters, the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, is demanding answers from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City over the approval of Kraken Financial’s limited-purpose master account.

In a letter Thursday, Waters asked Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid to respond by April 10, outlining what Kraken’s approval means in practice; which Federal Reserve services it can access; the conditions or restrictions that apply and what anti-money laundering and consumer protection measures were considered.

Kraken’s banking unit was granted a limited-purpose master account by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City earlier this month. It was seen as a milestone for the crypto industry as several crypto-linked US companies have been pursuing a master account with the Fed for years. 

The account provides direct access to Fedwire, the Fed’s core payments system, potentially allowing Kraken to move money on the same rails used by banks and credit unions. 

“The Kansas City Fed’s announcement does not disclose specific information about Kraken’s access to the range of Federal Reserve financial services due to the confidentiality of business information provided by applicants,” Waters wrote in the letter.

“Answers to these questions are critical to ensuring that the process of approving Federal Reserve Bank account access is conducted consistently with the law, with impartiality, and in a manner that continues to foster a safe and efficient payment system,” she added. 

Full transparency required to mitigate risks, Waters argues

Waters also argued that Kraken’s access to the Federal Reserve’s payment system raises policy, regulatory and consumer protection concerns. As a result, she said full transparency and clear legal grounding are required to ensure any risks are properly managed.

“Innovations in payments, digital assets, tokenization, and even artificial intelligence are rapidly outpacing statutory frameworks developed to mitigate risk, promote competition, and protect consumers in a traditional financial environment,” Waters wrote.

“Given this environment, much is required of those who exercise discretionary authority over safe access to, and operation of, our nation’s critical financial infrastructure,” she added.

Related: SEC is no longer a ‘cop on the beat‘ on crypto, says US lawmaker

US crypto companies that have been pursuing Fed master accounts include Caitlin Long’s Custodia Bank, which filed a court petition in late 2025 to renew its bid.

Crypto platform Anchorage Digital Bank also applied for an account last year and Ripple has applied through its Standard Custody & Trust Company.

Waters is classed as “strongly against crypto” by advocacy group

Crypto advocacy group Stand With Crypto has a scorecard for US politicians on how supportive they are of crypto based on public statements and voting behavior.

Waters is listed by the group as “strongly against crypto,” based on five statements and six votes against crypto legislation, including the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act and the GENIUS Act.

She also called for a hearing with Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins last year, citing concerns about the agency’s dismissal of crypto enforcement cases.

Magazine: How crypto laws changed in 2025 — and how they’ll change in 2026