|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Bitcoin Core developer Cory Fields has proposed a way to make quantum attackers pay for trying to steal bitcoin, and it works a lot like a booby trap.
In a post to the bitcoin-dev mailing list on 4th November, Fields described what he calls “quantum landmines.” Anyone who tries to move coins from a wallet exposed to quantum attack would first have to lock up the same amount of their own bitcoin as collateral. If the real owner shows up during the waiting period, they take back their coins and keep the thief’s collateral too.
Fields, who works at MIT’s Digital Currency Initiative, called the idea a “thought experiment.” It has no BIP number, and the rules needed to enforce it have not been written.
Bitcoin’s Quantum Threat
A powerful quantum computer could, in theory, work out a private key from a public key. Some older bitcoin outputs, including early coins linked to Satoshi Nakamoto, already have their public keys visible on chain.
Under Fields’ design, an owner would “arm” their coins in advance by creating a small output in a quantum-safe format that secretly commits to a proof of ownership. Nobody else can tell which wallets are armed.
If an attacker then tries to sweep a vulnerable coin, the network would make them post matching collateral from a quantum-safe wallet. For instance, stealing 1 BTC would mean posting 1 BTC. Both the stolen coins and the collateral would then be frozen for a set period.
If the true owner still holds their keys, they reveal the hidden proof inside that window and claim both. Because a thief cannot know which coins are trapped, every attempt becomes a gamble with their own money.
There’s a catch, however. The design only protects owners who still control their keys. Coins that are lost, including those attributed to Satoshi, cannot be armed, so they stay exposed.
There is also a cost for honest users. The Bitcoin blockchain has no way of telling a thief from an owner moving their own coins, so legitimate holders of exposed coins would face the same collateral demand.
Additionally, none of it works until Bitcoin agrees on a quantum-safe wallet standard and a consensus change to enforce the rules, neither of which exists today.
The Race for Quantum Security
The proposal lands in a busy week for quantum debate. On 4th November, Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake said he hopes to “wrap up the full post-quantum and post-AI transition” by December 2028, a year ahead of the Foundation’s current roadmap. Days earlier, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong told analysts that a quantum threat to crypto is “more of a matter of when, not if.” Bitcoin Cash developers, meanwhile, are pushing to lock in a post-quantum signature upgrade on 15th November.
Some newer networks have approached this challenge from the opposite direction by building post-quantum security into the protocol from the outset. One of these is Synergy Network, a Layer-1 blockchain with a live public testnet, which says its Aegis security layer applies post-quantum cryptography across key exchange, transactions, messaging and data storage.
Co-founder Justin Hutzler, who has been involved in efforts aimed at making Bitcoin quantum-secure, welcomes the new proposal.
“The quantum landmine concept is particularly interesting because it approaches quantum security from both cryptographic and economic perspectives. By combining concealed ownership commitments, time-locked transactions, and financial penalties for attempted theft, it introduces an additional layer of protection for legacy Bitcoin holdings that may remain vulnerable even after quantum-resistant transaction standards are introduced,” he stated.
However, holders with verifiable ownership commitments should be allowed to migrate their assets without posting the collateral, Hutzler says. This process can be enhanced by “noncustodial recovery agents” that can intervene to ensure the assets only go to the original holder’s quantum-safe address.
“These ideas would require careful consensus-level engineering, but they illustrate why quantum resilience must extend beyond simply replacing cryptographic algorithms,” he added.
Currently, Fields’ post is just a starting point for discussion, not a formal proposal for the Bitcoin network. Any version of it would need a quantum-safe address type, wallet support, and broad agreement from node operators before it could go live.
For now, the idea adds to a growing list of Bitcoin quantum proposals, from coin freezes to new output types, that the community has yet to settle on.
Disclaimer: The information in this article is for general purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. The author’s views are personal and may not reflect the views of Chain Affairs. Before making any investment decisions, you should always conduct your own research. Chain Affairs is not responsible for any financial losses.
I’m your translator between the financial Old World and the new frontier of crypto. After a career demystifying economics and markets, I enjoy elucidating crypto – from investment risks to earth-shaking potential. Let’s explore!
