Ethereum’s updated roadmap adds native rollups, stronger privacy, and post-quantum scaling as advances in cryptography and AI reshape the network’s long-term technical priorities, according to co-founder Vitalik Buterin.

Ethereum (ETH) co-founder Vitalik Buterin compared the network’s 2023 roadmap with its current Strawmap in an Aug. 10 X post, identifying several technologies that have gained, lost, or changed priority over the past three years.

Buterin said the two plans retain substantial overlap, but the order and implementation of several goals have changed. Quantum security has moved closer to the front of the roadmap, while verifiable delay functions and some proposed Ethereum Virtual Machine improvements have received less attention.

Older technical designs have also been replaced as Ethereum researchers identified alternatives. Plans involving Verkle trees shifted toward a unified binary tree and later a PBT design, while state expiry evolved into a broader proposal for new state types.

The biggest difference, according to Buterin, comes from the areas that did not appear in the 2023 roadmap. These include native privacy, post-quantum scaling, simpler specifications for formal verification, markets for future blob and gas capacity, native rollups, and a wider range of possible replacements or modifications for the EVM.

Ethereum privacy and quantum security move forward

Native privacy is one of the clearest additions to Ethereum’s long-term direction. Buterin listed keyed nonces, recent roots, parts of FOCIL, lean privacy pools, and wormholes among the mechanisms now being explored.

Keyed nonces could make it harder for observers to connect a user’s transactions, while recent-root mechanisms may allow private applications to verify recent blockchain states without revealing a complete history. FOCIL, meanwhile, is intended to make transaction inclusion more resistant to censorship by block builders.

The changes build on Buterin’s three-step Ethereum privacy plan released in May. That proposal combined account abstraction with FOCIL, keyed nonces, and changes at the wallet and access layers to reduce metadata leaks.

Post-quantum scaling has also become a separate priority. Ethereum currently depends on cryptographic systems that could eventually become vulnerable if sufficiently powerful quantum computers emerge. Replacing them without sharply increasing signature sizes, verification costs, or network bandwidth presents an additional scaling problem.

The current roadmap considers LeanSPHINCS signatures, signature aggregation, and “zkzk frames” as potential parts of the solution. Crypto.news previously reported that an Ethereum researcher demonstrated account-level post-quantum protection at an estimated cost of $0.07 per account, showing that wallet-level preparation may begin before a full protocol upgrade.

Ethereum’s Strawmap is not a finalized schedule. It is a coordination document covering proposed upgrades through 2029, with individual changes still requiring research, testing, and agreement among developers before they can reach the network.

Native rollups enter Ethereum’s design space

Native rollups were not included in the 2023 roadmap because zero-knowledge proof systems were not mature enough for developers to seriously consider integrating them into Ethereum’s base protocol, Buterin said.

Rollups currently operate as separate layer-2 systems. They process transactions outside Ethereum’s main execution layer and submit proofs or transaction data to the base network. Each rollup generally maintains its own contracts, proof system, upgrade controls, and security assumptions.

A native rollup would move part of that verification process into Ethereum itself. The base protocol could provide a standardized mechanism for checking state transitions, potentially reducing the amount of custom infrastructure each rollup must maintain.

Such a change could simplify the relationship between Ethereum and its layer-2 networks, though the exact design remains unsettled. Developers would still need to decide what functions should become native, how different virtual machines would be supported, and whether protocol-level verification could avoid creating new complexity.

The proposal arrives as Ethereum’s broader scaling approach changes. Buterin said the network is moving away from trying to scale every type of activity through one general mechanism. Instead, developers may build highly scalable but more restricted systems for common use cases such as token transfers, decentralized exchange trades, and privacy protocols.

This approach could allow Ethereum to process specific high-volume activities more efficiently without requiring every node or application to support the same expanded execution environment.

Blob and gas futures are another addition that did not exist as a developed roadmap concept in 2023. Such markets could allow users or layer-2 networks to lock in future access to Ethereum’s data or execution capacity, reducing uncertainty over costs during periods of heavy demand.

AI could make Ethereum easier to verify

Ethereum’s updated roadmap also places more weight on simplifying the protocol specification so developers can formally verify its behavior.

Formal verification uses mathematical proofs to determine whether software follows its intended rules. Applying it to an entire blockchain protocol has historically required substantial time and specialist work, particularly when the protocol includes multiple clients, cryptographic systems, and interacting layers.

Buterin argued that advances in artificial intelligence are making large-scale verification more practical. He previously said AI-assisted formal verification could become the “final form” of software development, allowing developers to combine optimized code with machine-checkable evidence that it works correctly.

That work is closely tied to Ethereum’s use of STARK proofs. Recursive STARKs allow one proof to verify another, producing compact evidence for increasingly large batches of computation.

Buterin said the same underlying verification method could eventually operate across Ethereum’s execution, consensus, and data layers. However, using a common proof system throughout the protocol would make the security of its implementation especially important, increasing the need for formal verification and independent testing.

Ethereum’s virtual machine may also change as these systems develop. Buterin said zkzk frames could require the protocol to expose an instruction set other than the EVM, with leanISA and RISC-V among the possible candidates.

Under one potential model, the EVM could continue serving developers and existing applications while operating as an intermediate representation above a simpler underlying instruction set. Buterin cautioned that this part of the design remains too early even for inclusion in the current Strawmap.

Roadmap remains a long-term coordination plan

Buterin’s comparison provides additional detail on Ethereum’s proposed Lean rebuild, which seeks to make the protocol quantum-safe, private, censorship-resistant, and easier to verify over the coming years.

The direction could eventually affect U.S. wallet providers, exchanges, institutional stakers, and layer-2 operators that rely on Ethereum. However, the post announced no immediate software release, hard fork, or mandatory action for users.

Each major proposal must still move through Ethereum’s research and governance process. Native rollups, alternative instruction sets, and post-quantum signatures remain technical directions rather than confirmed features with fixed activation dates.

Ethereum (ETH) showed no clear positive reaction to the roadmap update. ETH traded near $1,875 at the time of writing, down about 2.6% over the previous 24 hours as the broader crypto market weakened.

The latest comparison nevertheless shows how Ethereum’s development priorities have widened since 2023. Scaling remains central, but privacy, quantum resistance, and verifiable protocol design now carry more weight in determining how the network could operate through the end of the decade.

Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.

All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.

BlackRock has expanded its Canadian spot-Bitcoin ETF lineup with two Toronto Stock Exchange listings, including one fund that pairs broad international equity exposure with a small allocation to Bitcoin. The new products begin trading Monday on the TSX.

The ETFs are the iShares Equity + Bitcoin ETF Portfolio (IBQT) and the iShares Core MSCI All-International Equity Index ETF (XINT). While both are managed through BlackRock Asset Management Canada under the RBC iShares alliance, only IBQT includes a direct Bitcoin component.

Key takeaways

• IBQT is a “core” equity fund with a 3% Bitcoin sleeve, implemented via exposure to BlackRock’s Canadian iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT).
• XINT provides diversified international equities by tracking the MSCI ACWI ex North America IMI Index across more than 5,000 companies.
• Both funds primarily hold other iShares ETFs, using fund-to-fund structures rather than selecting individual stocks directly.
• BlackRock positions Bitcoin access as a small allocation within a broader portfolio approach rather than a standalone Bitcoin product.

A Canadian equity fund with a Bitcoin allocation

IBQT is designed to combine globally diversified equities with limited Bitcoin exposure. According to BlackRock, the fund allocates 97% of its portfolio to Canadian, U.S., international and emerging-market equities, with the remaining 3% dedicated to Bitcoin exposure through BlackRock’s Canadian iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT), which trades on Cboe Canada.

Importantly, IBQT does not attempt to hold individual stock positions on its own. Instead, it primarily invests in other iShares ETFs to gain both its equity exposure and its Bitcoin component. The structure matters for investors who are evaluating how Bitcoin is being integrated: rather than building a portfolio around crypto volatility, IBQT is framed as an incremental allocation inside an equity-oriented portfolio.

XINT targets ex–North America international diversification

The second listing, XINT, focuses on international equities outside Canada and the United States. BlackRock states that the fund tracks the MSCI ACWI ex North America IMI Index, a benchmark that aims to capture large-, mid-, and small-cap companies across developed and emerging markets.

BlackRock also highlights the breadth of the index XINT follows: exposure to more than 5,000 companies spanning over 40 developed and emerging markets outside Canada and the U.S. For Canadian investors who prefer a “set and track” approach to international equity diversification, XINT offers a standalone index-linked option alongside IBQT’s hybrid design.

What BlackRock says about scale in Canada and beyond

Both funds are managed by BlackRock Asset Management Canada through the RBC iShares alliance. BlackRock said its iShares ETF business managed approximately $6.2 trillion in assets across more than 1,700 ETFs as of June 30.

That scale is relevant when new ETF products launch, because it can influence operational maturity—such as liquidity management, fund administration practices, and index/fund replication workflows—especially for multi-asset products that rely on holding other ETFs.

Bitcoin access follows BlackRock’s existing ETF footprint

IBQT’s Bitcoin sleeve routes through BlackRock’s Canadian iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT). BlackRock’s U.S.-listed iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) is also a major reference point in the company’s spot Bitcoin ecosystem.

CoinMarketCap data indicates IBIT is the largest U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF by assets under management, with about $47.9 billion in AUM at the time referenced by the listing data: CoinMarketCap.

By using IBIT as the mechanism for its 3% Bitcoin allocation, IBQT effectively imports the established Bitcoin ETF wrapper into a broader equity product. That approach may appeal to investors seeking Bitcoin exposure without making it the dominant risk driver—though it also means the Bitcoin allocation will typically be smaller in magnitude than what many standalone Bitcoin ETFs provide.

Why this matters for Canadian investors

Bringing a “small allocation” Bitcoin fund to the TSX signals a continued push to normalize crypto exposure inside traditional portfolio frameworks. For investors, the practical question is how the 3% Bitcoin allocation changes the character of an equity-heavy holding—especially in periods when Bitcoin trades independently of global equities.

Traders and portfolio managers may also watch how BlackRock’s fund-to-fund implementation performs in Canada, since IBQT’s design depends on the underlying Canadian iShares Bitcoin ETF for its BTC exposure while the rest of the portfolio is tied to broad equity holdings via iShares ETFs.

As with any newly launched ETFs, attention will likely turn to how assets build after the initial trading start, as well as to whether the funds attract consistent flows from investors seeking either diversified international equities (XINT) or a blended approach that includes Bitcoin (IBQT).

Investors should monitor near-term developments such as IBQT’s uptake on the TSX, trading liquidity as the market digests the new hybrid structure, and how BlackRock’s Canadian iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT)—the source of the BTC sleeve—continues to perform as demand for Bitcoin exposure broadens beyond standalone products.

TRON ended the second quarter with a major stablecoin milestone: it recorded $87.9 billion in circulating USDT, putting it ahead of Ethereum on the same metric, while processing $2.1 trillion worth of USDT transfers over the quarter. The figures underscore how deeply USDT liquidity has embedded itself in TRON’s rails, even as parts of the ecosystem show softer momentum elsewhere.

According to a Messari report on the network’s second-quarter performance, USDT represented 98.5% of TRON’s stablecoin market. Stablecoin supply on TRON also rose, climbing 4.1% quarter-over-quarter to a record $89.2 billion. After a drop in Q1, average daily USDT transfer volume resumed growth, increasing 4.3% to $22.8 billion.

Key takeaways

• TRON led on USDT circulation in Q2, reaching $87.9B and processing $2.1T in USDT transfers during the quarter.
• Stablecoin dominance remained extreme, with USDT making up 98.5% of TRON’s stablecoin supply.
• Network usage hit new highs, including 14.6M transactions on June 15 and record-level daily activity.
• Fees reversed direction, rising 15.9% to $699.4M, the first quarterly increase after a prior governance change.
• DeFi activity cooled even as payments grew, with DeFi TVL down 1.9% and DEX volumes falling for a fourth straight quarter.

USDT expansion drives TRON’s transaction growth

Messari attributes TRON’s improved throughput to stronger day-to-day demand for USDT transfers. The network averaged 11.8 million daily transactions in Q2, up 8.7% from the prior quarter. Active usage also improved: average daily active addresses increased 11.7% to 3.6 million. The report also highlights the peak day, when TRON processed 14.6 million transactions on June 15.

From an investor and market-structure perspective, this matters because USDT activity often translates into consistent utilization of on-chain infrastructure. Even when broader on-chain applications fluctuate, stablecoin transfer volume can sustain network demand—particularly on chains where stablecoins are heavily concentrated.

Fees recover after an earlier governance shift

Beyond transaction counts, the report notes that TRON’s fee environment changed as well. Network fees rose 15.9% to $699.4 million in Q2, described as the first quarterly increase since an August 2025 governance change reduced the network’s energy unit price. In other words, Q2’s fee growth appears tied not only to higher activity, but also to a longer arc in TRON’s fee mechanics after that policy adjustment.

Still, the relationship between network fees and usage can be nonlinear when protocol parameters change. Traders and builders watching TRON may want to pay close attention to whether future fee levels keep rising with demand or whether they plateau as the impact of the earlier energy-unit pricing adjustment stabilizes.

DeFi softens while supply growth continues

Despite the payment-heavy momentum, parts of TRON’s on-chain ecosystem showed uneven performance. Messari reports that DeFi TVL fell 1.9% to $4.4 billion during the quarter. Decentralized exchange activity also cooled: average daily DEX volume dropped 21.7% to $49.3 million, marking a fourth consecutive quarterly decline.

This divergence—strong stablecoin transfer volume alongside weaker DeFi engagement—suggests that Q2’s growth may have been driven more by utility and circulation than by risk-taking or trading depth on TRON’s DeFi venues. For users, this can affect liquidity conditions and token execution quality on DEXs; for developers, it may signal that ecosystem growth is currently being led by transfers rather than by on-chain lending, borrowing, and trading.

Meanwhile, the report indicates that TRX supply remained inflationary. Even with higher activity, circulating supply increased by 87 million tokens during the quarter, with issuance continuing to outpace burns. That dynamic is notable because it can influence long-term expectations around token supply pressure, particularly when network usage is improving but supply reduction mechanisms aren’t yet keeping up.

Institutional access expands through tokenization and custody

While on-chain metrics show clear usage trends, institutional infrastructure around TRON also advanced during the quarter. Messari highlights that Securitize launched Hamilton Lane’s tokenized Senior Credit Opportunities Fund on TRON—its first TRON-issued asset. The fund reportedly started with about $4.3 million under management.

Broader institutional interest also included token listing and potential product developments. Grayscale reportedly added TRX to its list of assets under consideration. Separately, a proposed staked TRX exchange-traded product from Canary Capital remained in registration.

On the market-access side, TRX trading availability improved across venues. Bitnomial launched spot TRX trading in the United States, while OKX Europe introduced MiFID-regulated TRX expiry perpetuals. The quarter also saw Binance.US restore trading in the token.

The institutional push continued after Q2 ended. Earlier coverage noted Anchorage Digital adding native TRX staking and custody for TRC-20 assets in July, enabling institutional clients to stake TRX directly from its custody platform. For market participants, custody-and-staking workflows can be a critical step toward deeper institutional adoption, as they reduce operational friction compared with self-custody or manual transfer processes.

Read together, TRON’s Q2 pattern looks less like a pure “DeFi rally” and more like a chain consolidating stablecoin circulation and steadily improving institutional plumbing. The key question for the next quarter is whether stronger USDT throughput can translate into renewed DeFi demand—particularly DEX volumes and TVL—or whether TRON will remain primarily a stablecoin settlement venue while trading and application activity lag behind.

Bitcoin Policy Institute and more than 40 digital-asset organizations have called on leading AI laboratories to give qualified open-source security researchers controlled access to frontier models as AI-assisted cyberattacks grow more capable.

Bitcoin coalition asks AI labs for controlled access

Bitcoin Policy Institute announced the initiative in an Aug. 10 X post, saying the coalition represents organizations from across the digital-asset ecosystem.

The open letter asks leading AI developers to provide qualified open-source defenders with trusted access to their most capable models. It does not call for unrestricted public access to models with advanced cybersecurity capabilities.

Instead, the signatories proposed a controlled program covering early access to frontier cybersecurity models, sufficient computing capacity, secure research environments, and direct channels with AI laboratory security teams.

Those resources would allow vetted researchers to examine Bitcoin wallets, payment infrastructure, and other open-source software before attackers can exploit newly discovered weaknesses.

“The past several weeks have made the need for this abundantly clear,” Bitcoin Policy Institute wrote.

Block, Coinbase, Strategy, MARA, Galaxy, BitGo, Brink, OpenSats, Chaincode Labs, Spiral, Trezor, Unchained, Btrust, and Fedi were among the organizations supporting the request.

The coalition argued that current model safeguards can restrict legitimate security research even as criminals and state-backed groups gain access to increasingly capable open or locally deployed systems. Its central message to AI laboratories was that defenders need an early opportunity to identify and repair vulnerabilities.

No leading AI laboratory had publicly announced a program responding to the coalition’s specific requests at the time of writing.

AI-assisted attacks raise pressure on crypto firms

The appeal follows mounting evidence that hackers are incorporating artificial intelligence into attacks against cryptocurrency companies and financial institutions.

North Korea-linked hacking group Kimsuky has reportedly built three local AI environments using Ollama, GPT4All, and Msty. The systems can support malware development, data analysis, phishing campaigns, and attack automation without transmitting sensitive queries to an external provider.

As crypto.news previously reported, the group produced AI-generated phishing material aimed at cryptocurrency, investment, and financial technology companies.

Local models create a particular challenge for model providers. An attacker running an open model on privately controlled hardware may not be subject to the monitoring, usage restrictions, or account suspensions imposed by commercial AI services.

That difference sits at the center of the coalition’s argument. Restricting trusted defenders may offer limited protection if malicious actors can use locally deployed models or bypass commercial safeguards while researchers remain unable to test the most capable systems.

The threat also carries a U.S. security angle. Several signatories, including Coinbase, Strategy, Block, MARA, and Galaxy, are publicly traded or U.S.-based companies with substantial exposure to Bitcoin infrastructure. Successful attacks could affect American customers, institutional custodians, and investors even when the vulnerable software is maintained by a global open-source community.

Bitcoin flaws show potential role for frontier models

Recent Bitcoin security incidents have demonstrated how weaknesses in open-source software can remain undetected for years.

A firmware build error affecting Coldcard hardware wallets reportedly weakened the entropy used to generate seed phrases. Attackers could then search a much smaller range of possible keys and drain wallets without obtaining physical access to the devices.

Galaxy Research estimated that confirmed Coldcard thefts reached 1,596 BTC, while a suspected additional attack wave could raise losses to about 2,055 BTC. The error had reportedly been present since 2021.

AI-assisted analysis subsequently expanded scrutiny beyond the original flaw. A crypto.news investigation found that automated reviews were surfacing similar classes of security weaknesses across the broader Bitcoin ecosystem.

Bitcoin Red Team provided another example of defensive AI use. The volunteer initiative reported finding 4,962 potential issues across 390 Bitcoin-related projects during fewer than 30 hours of AI-assisted code reviews.

Of those findings, 720 were initially classified as high or critical severity, although automated findings still require human reproduction and verification. More than one-fifth had reportedly been reproduced when crypto.news covered the review campaign.

Those results illustrate both the potential and limits of frontier models. AI can examine large codebases faster than small volunteer teams, but qualified researchers are still needed to remove false positives, test exploitability, and disclose verified vulnerabilities safely.

Bitcoin security funding expands beyond AI access

The open letter adds to a broader push to increase resources available to Bitcoin security researchers.

Strategy, BlackRock, Coinbase, and six other companies recently established the Bitcoin Security Consortium. Its members pledged $15 million over three years to fund developers and researchers working on Bitcoin’s long-term security.

Post-quantum cryptography is the consortium’s initial focus, though its mandate covers broader protocol security. Members said they would choose funding recipients independently and would not direct Bitcoin development or take positions on proposed protocol changes.

Galaxy separately opened a $5 million Bitcoin security fund covering new signature systems, wallet-migration tools, audits, and research into quantum-resistant protections.

Industry-wide losses continue to increase despite those initiatives. Immunefi reported that crypto projects lost roughly $110 million to hacks in July. The security platform recorded 164 incidents through Aug. 3 and projected that the number of hacks exceeding $1 million could reach a record 114 in 2026.

The Bitcoin Policy Institute coalition is now asking AI companies to complement financial support with technical access. Whether laboratories accept that proposal will depend on their ability to verify researchers, supervise potentially sensitive work, and prevent advanced cybersecurity models from being redirected toward offensive activity.