In brief
\nQuantum computers threaten blockchain security by cracking private keys with Shor\u2019s algorithm.
\nChains using EdDSA, like Solana and Sui, are easier to upgrade for quantum resistance.
\nOlder chains like Bitcoin face steep risks and costly upgrades, or risk leaving assets exposed.<\/p>\n
Quantum computing could one day break the cryptographic foundations that secure trillions of dollars in crypto assets\u2014and according to a new report from Mysten Labs, some blockchains are more unprepared than others.<\/p>\n
The report<\/a>, released Wednesday, argues that networks using the EdDSA signature scheme\u2014such as Solana<\/a>, Sui<\/a>, and Near\u2014are structurally better positioned to withstand quantum threats.<\/p>\n Older chains like Bitcoin and Ethereum, which rely on the ECDSA system, face steeper cryptographic and logistical hurdles to implement post-quantum defenses.<\/p>\n \ufeff<\/p>\n As more corporations and governments establish Bitcoin treasuries<\/a>, Kostas Chalkias, co-founder and Chief Cryptographer at Mysten Labs, said the pressure to meet post-quantum security standards is growing.<\/p>\n “Governments are well aware of the risks posed by quantum computing. Agencies worldwide have issued mandates that classical algorithms like ECDSA and RSA must be deprecated by 2030 or 2035,” Chalkias told Decrypt.<\/p>\n “That means if your blockchain supports sovereign assets, national treasuries in crypto, ETFs, or CBDCs, it will soon be required to adopt post-quantum cryptographic standards, if your community cares about long-term credibility and mass adoption,” he added.<\/p>\n Edwards-curve Digital Signature Algorithm (EdDSA<\/a>) is a newer, faster, and easier-to-implement digital signature scheme that avoids common Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA<\/a>) pitfalls, like compromised security from weak random number generation, nonce reuse, and side-channel leakage.<\/p>\n Both Bitcoin<\/a> and Ethereum<\/a> currently rely on ECDSA for transaction security and will eventually need to upgrade to quantum-resistant algorithms.<\/p>\n \ud83d\udea8 BREAKING: Sui Research just dropped a major breakthrough in quantum transition of “some” blockchains. Unfortunately it works for Sui, Solana, Near, Cosmos and other EdDSA-based chains, but not for Bitcoin and Ethereum \ud83d\ude22<\/p>\n Here is the paper: https:\/\/t.co\/XdsC90zQi9<\/a><\/p>\n *Afaik this\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/8Sxcqtegjh<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Kostas Kryptos (@kostascrypto) July 28, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n Chalkias warned that quantum computing poses an existential threat to cryptography and warned that once quantum computers<\/a> scale, they could break the cryptographic assumptions behind most existing blockchains.<\/p>\n The threat stems from quantum machines\u2019 ability to solve complex problems using Shor\u2019s Algorithm<\/a>. The method can quickly factor large numbers, making it capable of breaking the encryption behind widely used cryptographic systems like RSA and ECDSA.<\/p>\n Paired with Shor’s algorithm, that capability could allow attackers to use quantum computers to reverse-engineer private keys from public blockchain data. Even holding the private keys, Chalkias said, may not matter in a post-quantum world.<\/p>\n “Even if someone still holds their Bitcoin or Ethereum private key, they may not be able to generate a post-quantum secure proof of ownership, and this comes down to how that key was originally generated, and how much of its associated data has been exposed over time,” he said.<\/p>\n While quantum computers aren\u2019t yet powerful enough to do this, according to San Jose State University computer science professor Ahmed Banafa, the time to prepare is now.<\/p>\n \u201cTo adopt this new method, Bitcoin will need to implement a hard fork,\u201d Banafa told Decrypt. \u201cThis means having to change wallet addresses, migrate funds, and handle all the complications that come with it.\u201d<\/p>\n Banafa acknowledged that the likelihood of this hardfork happening is small, pointing to the dispute<\/a> in the Ethereum community over whether or not to rollback the blockchain after a hack that led to the creation of Ethereum Classic<\/a> in 2015.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s similar to when Ethereum split into Ethereum and Ethereum Classic,\u201d he said. \u201cWe could see a similar split in Bitcoin, with some people insisting on a different approach and refusing to follow proposed upgrades.\u201d<\/p>\n Another issue Banafa noted was the sheer number of Bitcoin and Ethereum wallets that have come into existence since the launch of those blockchains.<\/p>\n \u201cThe real challenge will be implementation\u2014if users don\u2019t upgrade or secure their accounts, they could pose a risk to the network,\u201d he said. \u201cAnd if they lose funds as a result, they may try to blame the network.\u201d<\/p>\n According to Mysten Labs, if Bitcoin had used EdDSA from the start, even wallets belonging to\u00a0Satoshi Nakamoto<\/a> could be made quantum-safe.<\/p>\n Banafa noted, however, that hindsight plays a role in this debate. In 2009, when Bitcoin launched, quantum computing wasn\u2019t on the radar.<\/p>\n \u201cBack in 2019, people assumed SHA-256 was strong enough\u2014it would take years to crack,\u201d he said. \u201cNo one expected quantum computing to become as powerful as it is now.\u201d<\/p>\n Generally Intelligent Newsletter<\/p>\n A weekly AI journey narrated by Gen, a generative AI model.<\/p>\n