CryptoUpdated×24•Originally published 16 April 2026•Updated 17 April 2026•

1 min read

Bitcoin Researchers Propose 'Signature Sunset' to Mitigate Quantum Risks

Key Facts

1Bitcoin researchers proposed a phased plan to restrict and eventually render quantum-vulnerable legacy signatures unspendable.

2The proposal aims to protect the network from future threats posed by quantum computers to stored funds.

The debate over Bitcoin's security has intensified following warnings from Nobel laureate Dr. John Martinis regarding quantum computing's ability to break encryption. However, the focus has shifted to technical trade-offs as Samson Mow warned that post-quantum cryptography could cause signature sizes to balloon by as much as 125 times. This massive increase in data volume raises concerns about new network attack vectors and potential congestion. These technical hurdles amplify existing fears regarding the permanent loss of legacy BTC and the feasibility of current mitigation strategies. While institutional players like BlackRock are expected to guide future upgrades, the community now faces a critical dilemma between quantum resilience and the fundamental scalability of the blockchain.

4 months ago

Version History

1 additional source confirmed this story

Version 244 months ago

What changed: Updated the story to include Samson Mow's warnings regarding the 125x increase in signature sizes and the technical risks associated with increased data volume.

Version 234 months ago

What changed: Updated the story to incorporate a high-level scientific warning from Nobel laureate John Martinis, increasing the perceived urgency of quantum threats to encryption.

Version 224 months ago

What changed: The story was updated to include Charles Hoskinson's warnings regarding the potential permanent locking of 1.7 million BTC and his criticism of security gaps in legacy address protection.

Version 214 months ago

What changed: The story was updated to include Adam Back's long-term timeline for quantum threats and the projected role of institutional players like BlackRock in managing network security transitions.

Version 204 months ago

What changed: Added Bernstein analysts' 3-5 year quantum risk timeline and Michael Saylor's perspective dismissing the threat while highlighting credit-driven bull market catalysts.

Version 194 months ago

What changed: Updated the story to include the new 2029 deadline set by Google and Cloudflare for quantum-resistant infrastructure implementation.

Version 184 months ago

What changed: Updated the story to include new research from Google indicating that Bitcoin's encryption is more vulnerable to quantum threats than previously thought.

Version 174 months ago

What changed: Added BitMEX's 'Canary Fund' proposal as a new alternative mechanism in the ongoing Bitcoin quantum-security debate.

Version 164 months ago

What changed: Updated to include Adam Back's emphasis on the necessity of immediate proactive preparation for quantum threats, despite them being a long-term risk.

Version 154 months ago

What changed: The story was updated to explicitly link BIP-361 to the potential freezing of legacy wallets deemed vulnerable to quantum threats.

Version 144 months ago

What changed: Updated the story to include the heated community debate sparked by developer Jameson Lopp on April 15, 2026, focusing on the status of 5.6 million dormant coins.

Version 134 months ago

What changed: Added Adam Back's comments regarding how the quantum migration could reveal the true scale of Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin holdings.

Version 124 months ago

What changed: Added Adam Back's opposition to forced wallet freezes in favor of opt-in upgrades, noting these discussions took place during Paris Blockchain Week.

Version 114 months ago

What changed: Added Adam Back's proposal for a 10-year migration timeline and his assessment that quantum threats are not yet practical.

Version 104 months ago

What changed: Added information regarding a new technical report from the non-profit Presidio Bitcoin, providing a broader ecosystem perspective on quantum risk assessment and migration coordination.

Version 94 months ago

What changed: Updated the story to include the specific 5-year migration deadline, the 6.9 million BTC target, and the confirmation that Satoshi-era coins are subject to the proposed freeze.

Version 84 months ago

What changed: Added context regarding the slow historical progression of quantum computing and highlighted the specific 'build now vs. react later' timing debate among developers.

Version 74 months ago

What changed: The story was updated to include the strategic split between Adam Back's advocacy for optional upgrades and Jameson Lopp's proposal for freezing vulnerable assets.

Version 64 months ago

What changed: Added a warning from Blockstream CEO Adam Back regarding the necessity of early preparation for quantum risks despite the threat being decades away.

Version 54 months ago

What changed: Updated the story to reflect the formal publication of BIP-361, identifying key contributors like Jameson Lopp and specifying the targeting of legacy ECDSA and Schnorr signatures.

Version 44 months ago

What changed: BitMEX clarified the trade-off between increased technical complexity and minimizing coin freezes in their proposal.

Version 34 months ago

What changed: Added details regarding the 'canary fund' acting as an attacker bounty and the shift from a fixed five-year timeline to a reactive 'wait and react' plan.

Version 24 months ago

What changed: Added a counter-proposal from BitMEX Research advocating for a 'canary fund' bounty system instead of the direct coin freezes suggested in BIP-361.

Version 14 months ago

What changed: Specified the target P2PK addresses and added details regarding the freezing of Satoshi Nakamoto's legacy holdings.