LIVE Web3 News

ARTICLE INFORMATION

CoinShares’ Bitcoin research report on quantum risk, practical safeguards

by ICN.live
February 9, 2026

Salma Al-Tamimi

Key Points

• The report says real exposure sits in old P2PK addresses, not across all holdings.
• Only about 10,200 BTC could move markets if broken, far below popular estimates.
• Current machines lack the qubits needed for one-day key reversal or faster.
• The paper urges measured upgrades, strong property rights, and careful wallet hygiene practices.

CoinShares’ Bitcoin research report argues quantum risk remains limited and manageable with measured engineering steps.

While the authors of this piece are concerned with where exposure is located (not with inflated headline numbers that create unnecessary fear), they explain how legacy P2PK addresses remain visible to the public on-chain. As per their analysis, there appears to be around 1.6 million BTC in those addresses, representing nearly eight percent of all available supply. However, they state that true disruption potential (i.e., threat to price stability) will be limited to approximately 10,200 BTC located in larger holdings due to the fact that if stolen at the same time, it could put pressure on the overall price. Conversely, everything else is spread out among thousands of smaller UTXOs that would take an enormous amount of time to crack.

Where is the danger actually concentrated?

Currently, the power of today’s hardware does not even come close to allowing for the theft of a public key in a trading timeframe, let alone reversing it. To reverse a public key in one day, you would need to have about 13 million physical qubits. While researchers have access to lab equipment in the millions, that number dwarfs them as well. Breaking an hour-long barrier would require systems to be millions of times more powerful than what currently exists. According to Ledger’s Charles Guillemet, “to break current asymmetric cryptography, one would need millions of qubits.” Furthermore, he states that increasing the number of qubits will increase the challenge of maintaining coherence quickly. In my opinion, these details provide evidence for patient-based planning and not panicked reactions or hasty forks.

ANOTHER MUST-WATCH ON ICN

Quantum computing risk needs context, not panic

The paper disputes estimates that label twenty percent to fifty percent of the total supply as vulnerable. These types of estimates typically combine vastly different risks into one frightening statistic. For example, some of the exposures can be attributed to exchanges that reused the same address for both withdrawals and deposits. Those exposures can be reduced by implementing easy-to-implement policies and good wallet hygiene. The study also takes issue with proposals to burn old coins via a soft fork.

According to the authors, doing so would be a violation of Bitcoin’s property rights, and the authors believe that it would be a step away from decentralizing the network. The authors recommend a gradual approach to upgrading to post-quantum signatures once they have been battle-tested. According to Adam Back, “Bitcoin adopts new signatures and continues to evolve defensively.”

CoinShares’ Bitcoin research report advocates for a gradual, tested upgrade process

Market pressures add to the urgency of this debate; however, the data points to caution. Price has fallen off its peak, and weekly net flows have turned negative in recent weeks. Long-term investors, such as pension funds and treasuries, are seeking clarity and direction as they navigate the market uncertainty. The study’s response seems to be straightforward.

Focus on the fundamentals of Bitcoin security that function today. When spending, use a new address each time. Do not reuse your public key. Educate your teams regarding P2PK addresses and implement migration plans wherever possible. Continue to fund ongoing research related to post-quantum schemes while avoiding introducing untested code into production. By taking these steps, you can protect your users without sacrificing core principles during a noisy market cycle.

ANOTHER MUST-READ ON ICN.LIVE

Alphabet shared record revenue, AI investment outlook weighs on shares

Practical steps for Bitcoin security today

Investors desire a framework of risk that is relevant to the agendas of investment committees and audits. This study provides a framework of risk based on two parameters, scope and timeline. Scope indicates that the only locations where exposure is still concentrated should be targeted. The timeline indicates the need to quantify the requirements for hardware to achieve this task and illustrate the gulf between today’s technology and what will be required to accomplish this feat. Using both lenses, fear is replaced with focused, methodical engineering. The message comes through clearly.

Quantum threats appear to be predictable rather than imminent. Investors follow the progress of research, track the development of hardware milestones, and make plans for phased migrations. They do not take rash action that jeopardizes user rights and trust. They provide resources to organizations developing tools that facilitate a seamless transition to post-quantum standards across wallets and other services.

bitcoin, Bitcoin network, cyber, Hero, Hero Ranking, Scheduled Articles, security

Why focus on P2PK addresses instead of everything with a visible public key?

P2PK addresses expose public keys permanently, which invites direct attention from adversaries. Other cases often involve temporary or avoidable reuse during movements between services. Teams reduce those cases through policy, rotation, and simple wallet hygiene. The study estimates about 1.6 million BTC in P2PK addresses, but only a small fraction sit in large pools that move markets. About 10,200 BTC meet that higher bar, which reframes the discussion around disruption rather than raw totals. Investors should map any legacy exposure, set migration plans, and avoid reuse. That approach addresses the core issue while preserving user rights and network neutrality.

Do current quantum machines threaten Bitcoin security during normal settlement windows?

The report says no. Key reversal in one day needs about 13 million physical qubits. That requirement exceeds laboratory systems by huge factors. One hour attacks look even more distant, with hardware needs millions of times greater. This gap gives space for measured planning. Developers continue research on post quantum signatures, while wallets avoid reuse and improve defaults. Exchanges strengthen procedures that limit visible public keys across long periods. Investors track hardware progress, but they keep perspective. Short term trading desks should still follow sound operational security, since simple mistakes create larger practical losses than future quantum attacks.

What actions make sense now for treasuries and funds managing Bitcoin exposure?

Begin with a clear inventory of addresses and exposure types. Identify any P2PK addresses and plan migration steps where possible. Set strict address reuse policies across desks and custodians. Review withdrawal practices and hot wallet settings that reveal public keys early. Ask vendors about post quantum plans and timelines without demanding rushed deployment. Encourage bug bounties and red team reviews before adopting new signature schemes. Maintain incident drills that test response steps if thefts occur. These actions reduce near term risks and prepare teams for future upgrades. Strong hygiene and staged planning deliver real protection without breaking property rights.

How does this compare with views from other leaders across crypto networks?

Views differ, which helps stress test plans. Some analysts cite higher exposure figures across the full supply. This report narrows the discussion to disruption risk tied to large P2PK pools. Leaders echo the patient path. Charles Guillemet highlights the need for millions of qubits before practical breaks. Adam Back supports adoption of post quantum signatures after careful review. On the smart contract side, the Ethereum post-quantum team studies options for that ecosystem. Together, these voices point toward steady work, stronger hygiene, and staged upgrades. That approach protects users while respecting rights and decentralization values across networks.

MORE FROM SPONSORED