Bitcoin veterans would scoop Satoshi’s coins if quantum hack hits 

A heated debate on social media on Saturday centered on the potential outcome of a quantum computer hacking into Satoshi Nakamoto’s Bitcoin wallet and subsequently selling those coins, making them available on the market.

Growing concerns over advancements in quantum computing have sparked urgent discussion across the cryptocurrency world about one of Bitcoin’s most intriguing and high‑stakes vulnerabilities: the safety of Satoshi Nakamoto’s estimated 1.1 million BTC hoard and other legacy holdings.

This discussion initially began when Josh Otten, a satirist, documentarian, and YouTuber with over one million subscribers, shared a post with his subscribers demonstrating a price chart that expressed the drastic drop of Bitcoin to $3.00.

At this point, Otten proposed that this situation could occur if a powerful quantum computer were to be employed in the robbery of Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1 million BTC and then sold.

The crypto community raises concerns about the impacts of quantum computing

In a statement, Willy Woo, a renowned, long-term Bitcoin investor and pioneer in on-chain analysis, mentioned that, “Many early investors would take advantage of the sudden drop. The Bitcoin network would endure; most coins aren’t at immediate risk.”

However, Woo highlighted that about 4 million BTC are currently kept in pay-to-public-key (P2PK) addresses, including Satoshi’s holdings. According to the long-term bitcoin investor, these addresses indicate the complete public key on the blockchain in the event of transactions, making them vulnerable to quantum attacks.

Meanwhile, several analysts also weighed in on the topic of discussion. They argued that when the full public key of a Bitcoin wallet is shown on the blockchain, it exposes these wallets to risk for future quantum attacks.

In the event of an adequately sophisticated quantum computer, the analysts noted that such a computer could likely obtain the private key from the public key in the future. This move will effectively occur when the full public key of a BTC wallet is present on the blockchain.

Contrastingly, sources mention that the latest types of BTC wallet addresses include better safeguards against quantum attacks. This is because they do not illustrate complete public keys on-chain. Notably, if the public key maintains anonymity, then a quantum computer will not be able to establish the matching private key from these details.

On the other hand, the cryptocurrency communities, particularly those supporting Bitcoin, have raised concerns about how quantum computing might impact BTC and the encryption that underpins cryptocurrencies. Some expressed the belief that quantum computing could pose significant challenges to the industry.

Adam Back asserts that Bitcoin will be a victim of a quantum threat in the future

Adam Back, a renowned British cryptographer and cypherpunk widely known as the inventor of Hashcash and as the co-founder and CEO of Blockstream, a leading Bitcoin infrastructure firm, recently asserted that BTC will not encounter a threat from quantum for the next 20 to 40 years.

Back argued that there is sufficient time to adopt post-quantum cryptography standards before the development of a powerful quantum computer that will have the capability to break current encryption and weaken cybersecurity measures. It is worth noting that these standards already exist.

Considering the intense nature of the situation, market analyst James Check commented that quantum computing does not pose a threat to the technology adopted in the Bitcoin ecosystem, as cryptocurrency users will likely shift to quantum-resistant addresses before the release of a practical quantum computer.

Check further explained that the real threat from quantum computing lies more in its likely effects on the market price of BTC. He also noted that there is no way the Bitcoin community will decide to freeze Satoshi’s coins before a quantum computer can access his wallets and ensure that those coins are back into circulation.

Source