Quantum computers are unlikely to pose a threat to Bitcoin anytime soon, according to Jameson Lopp, co-founder of Casa, a company that manages crypto.
This comment comes amid escalating debates about the advancements in quantum computing and whether they are nearing a level that poses a threat to the cryptographic systems used to protect blockchains like Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Experts disagree on when quantum computers will pose a threat to Bitcoin.
In a recent post on X (formerly Twitter), Lopp stated that quantum computers will not be able to attack Bitcoin anytime soon.
No, quantum computers will not destroy Bitcoin in the near future. We all need to keep an eye on its development... We should hope for the best outcomes but also prepare for the worst-case scenarios, Lopp posted.
Lopp's views on the timeline align with many experts, who affirm that quantum computers are not an immediate threat to the network. Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream, also recently commented that the short-term risk is 'none.'
This kind of thing is still decades away. It's still very early, and they still have major research and development problems in every area of applied physics that are necessary to even prove whether it can be scaled to be useful. But we should all be prepared for the quantum era, Adam Back said.
Charles Hoskinson, founder of Cardano, shares a similar stance, arguing that the threat of quantum to current blockchains is being overstated and is not urgent at this time. Hoskinson also noted that even if blockchains could switch to quantum-resistant cryptography, such a change would greatly reduce efficiency.
However, some experts believe that the timeline is shortening. David Carvalho, CEO of Naoris Protocol, warned that quantum computers might be able to breach Bitcoin's security within the next 2 to 3 years.
On another note, Michele Mosca, a researcher at the University of Waterloo, predicts a 1 in 7 chance that basic public-key cryptography will be compromised by 2026.
At Metaculus, the timeline for the capability of quantum computers to factor one of the RSA numbers has also been accelerated, moving from 2052 to 2034.
The Quantum Doomsday Clock project has become even more urgent, as it predicts that quantum computers will be able to breach Bitcoin's encryption systems by March 8, 2028.
Why is protecting Bitcoin from quantum difficult?
Although experts disagree on the timeline, many agree on one point: if an upgrade to defend against quantum is necessary, the process will take time. Lopp stated that the transition to post-quantum standards could take up to 5 to 10 years.
When asked why discussions about the risks of quantum computing often focus more on Bitcoin than on traditional financial institutions like banks, Lopp pointed to significant differences in the speed of system upgrades.
Because they can upgrade the system faster than the Bitcoin ecosystem by many orders of magnitude, he said.
Meanwhile, another market observer explained that the reasons for transitioning blockchain networks to quantum-resistant encryption are significantly more complex than in centralized systems.
For the banking and internet sectors, the transition is considered much easier. When encryption standards change, they can activate new algorithms through coordinated updates, phase out old keys, issue new certificates, and even force users to change, he stated.
In contrast, Bitcoin has no central authority that can enforce such changes, so the transition to post-quantum signatures will require broad social consensus, deep technical coordination, and the voluntary participation of users.
Analysts also noted that lost, abandoned, or inactive Bitcoin and wallets cannot be transferred. As such, part of the supply will remain vulnerable if a quantum attack can indeed occur. This technical limitation further complicates the situation.
Most post-quantum signature structures have key and signature sizes significantly larger than ECDSA. In systems with block size limitations that need to replicate data globally, this is not a trivial matter. While increasing the burden can be managed by bank servers or web connections, for blockchain, it becomes a problem of transaction throughput according to the posted agreement.
Thus, the decentralization that is central to the security and resilience of Bitcoin is also a factor that makes the encryption adaptation take longer, be more complex, and harder to implement than centralized systems.
