Galaxy has launched a Bitcoin quantum defense program that will make up to $5 million available to developers and researchers working on tools meant to protect the network from future quantum computing attacks.
The program, called the Bitcoin Quantum Readiness Initiative, will support work on post-quantum cryptography, wallet migration tools, transaction designs, code audits, and technical research. Galaxy said the effort is intended to help Bitcoin prepare before powerful quantum computers are capable of weakening the cryptography that secures the network.
The initiative also creates a dedicated research stream and a Quantum Advisory Council made up of specialists in quantum computing and cryptography. The first named members are Barry Sanders of the University of Calgary, Damien Bérubé of MIT, and Eran Tromer of Boston University.
Although today’s quantum computers are not believed to be capable of breaking Bitcoin’s core cryptography, the launch shows that major digital asset firms now see the issue as a practical engineering challenge rather than a distant theoretical concern. Bitcoin relies heavily on elliptic curve cryptography, a form of mathematical protection that could be vulnerable to a sufficiently advanced, fault-tolerant quantum computer.
Galaxy said grant applications are open immediately. Funding will be awarded based on milestones, with support directed to contributors building post-quantum signature schemes, quantum-resistant transaction systems, migration tools for wallets and custodians, and independent audits of proposed code.
Why the timing matters
The main concern is that a large enough quantum computer could use Shor’s algorithm, a known quantum method, to derive a private key from a visible public key. In Bitcoin, private keys are what allow coins to be spent. If a future machine could calculate private keys quickly enough, exposed funds could be at risk.
That risk does not mean Bitcoin is currently broken. Existing quantum machines remain too limited, noisy, and error-prone for such an attack. Security researchers generally separate today’s quantum devices from future “fault-tolerant” machines, which would need large numbers of error-corrected logical qubits to perform advanced cryptographic attacks reliably.
Still, the policy and standards environment has moved quickly. In 2024, the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology completed its first set of post-quantum cryptography standards. That same year, federal planning documents set a 2031 deadline for U.S. agencies to update vulnerable systems against potential quantum-based cyberattacks.
For Bitcoin, the issue is more complicated than it is for a company or government agency. The network is decentralized, and changes to its core security assumptions require extensive review, broad consensus, testing, wallet support, and careful deployment. Even when a technical path is clear, Bitcoin upgrades can take years.
Galaxy’s program is designed to shorten that lead time by funding the small but growing group of developers and academics already studying quantum resistance for Bitcoin.
What Galaxy plans to fund
The grants will focus on practical infrastructure rather than general discussion. Galaxy said it is looking for work that can move Bitcoin closer to a tested post-quantum transition plan.
That includes new signature schemes that could eventually replace or supplement current elliptic curve signatures. Bitcoin now uses the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm and Schnorr signatures, both of which depend on elliptic curve assumptions. A post-quantum migration would likely require signatures based on different mathematics.
The program will also support transaction tools that make quantum-safe spending possible, along with migration software for wallets, institutions, and custodians. This is important because a change at the protocol level would not be enough on its own. Wallets would need to generate new types of addresses, exchanges and custodians would need to upgrade infrastructure, and users would need clear paths for moving funds safely.
Audits will also be eligible for funding. That detail matters because post-quantum cryptography is still a developing field. Many proposed schemes have larger signatures, different performance trade-offs, and new implementation risks. Independent review would be needed before any design could be seriously considered for Bitcoin.
Galaxy said the advisory council will review applications and help guide its internal research agenda. The research arm of the initiative is expected to publish ongoing assessments of quantum risks to Bitcoin’s security model, with the goal of helping policymakers, developers, custodians, and traders understand the timeline and trade-offs.
The problem with exposed public keys
One of the hardest parts of Bitcoin’s quantum discussion is that not all coins face the same type of exposure.
Some older Bitcoin outputs, especially pay-to-public-key outputs, show the raw public key directly on the blockchain. These outputs are often described as more exposed because a future quantum attacker would not need to wait for the owner to spend the funds before seeing the public key.
Other Bitcoin address types hide the public key until a transaction is made. In those cases, a public key becomes visible when funds are spent. A sufficiently fast quantum attacker, in theory, could try to calculate the private key and create a competing transaction before the original transaction is confirmed. Whether such an attack would be realistic depends on the speed and scale of the future quantum machine.
Recent public estimates cited in the broader Bitcoin security debate suggest that about 1.7 million coins sit in ancient address types that reveal public keys directly. Other estimates claim that a much larger share of the supply could be exposed in some way because public keys have already appeared on-chain through address reuse or previous spending activity.
Those figures are disputed depending on how exposure is defined. Coins in old pay-to-public-key outputs are not the same as coins in addresses where a public key appeared in a prior transaction. But the numbers have intensified debate because even a partial quantum threat could create a large target.
The issue is especially sensitive because many early coins have not moved for years. Some may belong to lost wallets. Others may be in deep cold storage. If Bitcoin ever adopted a transition rule that required funds to move before a deadline, owners who missed the process could face serious consequences.
A difficult debate over freezing old funds
Some Bitcoin developers and security specialists have argued that the network may eventually need strict rules to prevent quantum-stolen coins from flooding the market. One idea discussed in technical circles is a staged migration period that would first block new funds from entering old, vulnerable address types and later reject legacy signatures entirely.
Such proposals remain controversial and are not current Bitcoin rules. They raise difficult questions about property rights, lost coins, dormant wallets, and the limits of protocol intervention.
Supporters of hard migration rules argue that if quantum attacks become realistic, allowing old signatures forever could create a permanent weakness. They say attackers could target dormant wallets with exposed public keys and move huge amounts of Bitcoin without the original owners’ consent.
Critics argue that freezing or disabling older spending paths would violate one of Bitcoin’s most important principles: that valid coins remain spendable by whoever controls the private key. They also warn that forcing a migration could harm users who hold keys offline, have inheritance arrangements, or are not closely following technical changes.
Bitcoin security researcher Jameson Lopp and other developers have publicly discussed the possibility of aggressive migration rules if the threat becomes urgent. Their position is not that funds should be frozen lightly, but that the network may need a defense against the wider damage caused by mass theft from exposed or abandoned wallets.
The debate is likely to grow as more formal proposals appear. Draft upgrade efforts, including work associated with BIP-360 and BIP-361, are among the attempts to define possible quantum-resistant paths for Bitcoin. These efforts are still part of the broader technical discussion and would require extensive review before any adoption.
Quantum research is moving faster
The urgency has been sharpened by rapid progress in quantum computing research and hardware funding.
A technical paper published by Alphabet researchers in March 2026 drew attention across the cryptography community by estimating that, under certain assumptions, cracking the relevant digital signature math could require far fewer logical qubits than many earlier projections suggested. The figure widely discussed from that work was about 1,200 logical qubits.
That number does not mean a Bitcoin-breaking machine exists. Logical qubits are not the same as physical qubits. A single reliable logical qubit may require many physical qubits, depending on the error-correction method and hardware quality. But the estimate added to concerns that the gap between theory and practice may be narrowing.
Corporate and government-backed spending is also increasing. Forecasts for the U.S. quantum computing sector suggest the market could exceed $8.5 billion by the middle of the next decade. Large technology companies, defense-linked laboratories, universities, and specialized hardware firms are all racing to improve qubit stability, error correction, and machine scale.
For Bitcoin developers, this creates a timing problem. Even if the most dangerous quantum machines remain years away, open-source security upgrades require long preparation. A post-quantum Bitcoin migration would need code, review, testing, wallet support, user education, and enough consensus to avoid splitting the network.
That process cannot be completed overnight.
Bitcoin is not alone
Bitcoin is the largest and most conservative blockchain network, but it is not the only one preparing for quantum risk. Research into post-quantum defenses is spreading across the digital asset sector, including work connected to Ethereum, the XRP Ledger, and independent cryptography teams.
Different networks face different challenges. Some can change faster because they have more frequent upgrade cycles or stronger coordination among core teams. Bitcoin’s strength is its resistance to rushed change, but that same feature means long-term threats must be addressed early.
Galaxy said it is open to participation from other institutions, researchers, and contributors that want to co-fund work or build complementary quantum-resistant tools. That invitation reflects the scale of the problem. A credible Bitcoin transition would require more than one company’s grant program.
What traders should watch
For traders and long-term holders, the immediate takeaway is not panic. Bitcoin’s cryptography has not been broken, and current quantum computers are not capable of the attacks being discussed.
The more practical issue is awareness. Wallet age, address reuse, custody arrangements, and future migration support may become increasingly important. Funds stored in very old address formats may receive more attention as the quantum debate becomes more concrete.
Security specialists generally advise avoiding address reuse, keeping wallet software updated, and following developments around Bitcoin improvement proposals. Custodians and institutions will also need to explain how they plan to handle any future migration, especially for cold storage systems designed to remain offline for years.
Galaxy’s initiative does not solve Bitcoin’s quantum problem by itself. But it adds funding, coordination, and public pressure to an area that has often been treated as too distant to prioritize.
The central question is no longer whether quantum computing could matter for Bitcoin. The question is whether the network can prepare early enough, carefully enough, and with enough agreement to protect users before the threat becomes real.
To deepen your understanding of Bitcoin’s security foundations, explore what is Bitcoin and how does it work in our detailed guide.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
