The Responsible Fintech Institute and digital-asset infrastructure provider Safeheron have launched a cross-regional pilot to test post-quantum cryptography for institutional wallet creation and blockchain transfers, bringing regulators and financial institutions into a shared environment designed to examine how quantum-resistant controls could operate across jurisdictions.
The proof of concept uses multi-party computation, or MPC, a system that divides the authority to approve a transaction among separate parties rather than placing a private key with one holder. The pilot supports ML-DSA-65, a post-quantum digital-signature algorithm standardized by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology in FIPS 204.
Testing will include wallet generation and on-chain transfers on NEAR’s quantum-resistant testnet. By using a test network rather than live institutional assets, participants can evaluate signature handling, approval workflows and cross-border governance without exposing customer funds or production systems.
Safeheron is leading the protocol and engineering work, while the Responsible Fintech Institute is coordinating governance and engagement among participants in multiple regulatory regions. The project’s named participants include Abu Dhabi Global Market, Bhutan’s Gelephu Financial Services Office, and the Malta Financial Services Authority, alongside Bison Bank and DK Bank. Other institutions are in discussions to join, according to the project description.
Testing institutional controls alongside cryptography
The project is structured around more than whether a post-quantum signature can validate a blockchain transaction. Participating institutions will use a shared application environment, allowing them to run quantum-resistant MPC signing under consistent conditions. That setup is intended to surface operational differences that can emerge when separate organizations use the same technical protocol under their own risk, compliance and authorization policies.
The tentative model is a non-custodial 2-of-2 MPC arrangement. In such a design, two separate parties would be required to participate in the transaction-signing process, while neither party independently controls the full signing capability. Financial institutions have increasingly used MPC to reduce single points of failure in wallet operations, especially where multiple teams, entities or service providers must be involved in approval.
Adding ML-DSA-65 changes the technical challenge. Today’s major public blockchains and wallet systems broadly rely on cryptographic methods designed around mathematical problems that a sufficiently capable quantum computer could eventually solve more efficiently. Post-quantum cryptography uses alternative algorithms intended to withstand those potential attacks.
The pilot does not suggest that practical quantum attacks on mainstream blockchain wallets are imminent. Its focus is instead on migration planning: determining how institutions could introduce new cryptographic tools before a security transition becomes urgent, while maintaining governance, transaction reliability and interoperability.
Regulators will initially participate as observers. A later phase is expected to bring them into a governance workstream, giving authorities a role in examining how the protocol could fit with supervisory expectations across different legal and financial frameworks.
A migration problem rather than a software update
The Bank for International Settlements made a similar point in its 2025 paper on quantum readiness in the financial system. The BIS said the transition to post-quantum cryptography would require coordinated planning, cryptographic agility and phased migration rather than a simple replacement of one algorithm with another.
That constraint is particularly relevant to digital assets. A blockchain transaction may involve a wallet provider, a regulated financial institution, an internal risk system, a custody or non-custodial arrangement, and a public network with its own rules for validating signatures. Changing the cryptography at one point in that chain does not automatically make the full process quantum-resistant.
The use of MPC gives the pilot an institutional focus that goes beyond testing an individual wallet. A bank or regulated firm may need to define which team holds approval rights, how emergency access works, how transactions are monitored and recorded, and whether the system can operate across entities located in different jurisdictions. Those questions can determine whether a cryptographic standard is practical to deploy at scale.
The project also places attention on interoperability. Institutions may ultimately face different post-quantum migration timelines among blockchains, wallet providers, cloud services and financial-market infrastructure. A protocol that works only in a closed technical environment would offer limited value for organizations that need to connect to several networks and counterparties.
Asian regulators are putting quantum readiness on formal agendas
The pilot arrives as Asian financial regulators increase their work on emerging technology risks, including quantum computing and artificial intelligence.
In July 2026, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Association of Banks in Singapore announced the AI-Driven Cyber and Technology Risk Taskforce, known as ACT. The industry initiative focuses on cyber and technology risks associated with frontier AI models, reflecting the growing overlap between financial-sector resilience, automated systems and advanced computing capabilities.
Hong Kong has made quantum preparedness a more explicit policy goal. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority incorporated quantum readiness into its Fintech 2030 strategy, introduced a Quantum Preparedness Index, and published a whitepaper intended to help benchmark banks’ progress toward post-quantum cryptography. The HKMA has set a target of full sector-wide quantum readiness by 2030.
Those initiatives are aimed largely at the banking sector, where public-key cryptography supports services ranging from secure communications to digital identity and payment systems. The Safeheron and Responsible Fintech Institute pilot applies the same transition challenge to digital-asset wallets and transaction infrastructure, where cryptographic signatures are directly tied to the authority to move assets.
Whitepaper and open-source plans could widen scrutiny
The organizations plan to publish a whitepaper covering the research program, protocol design and testing results. The underlying protocol is also expected to be released as open-source software later, which would allow outside researchers and security specialists to review the implementation.
Open-source release would not by itself establish the protocol as an industry standard. It could, though, give other wallet providers, financial institutions and technical groups a common reference point for assessing quantum-resistant MPC designs rather than developing isolated systems without shared testing results.
The practical output of the pilot will depend on the issues participants identify during testing: whether ML-DSA-65 can be incorporated into transaction workflows without unacceptable complexity, whether MPC controls remain manageable for regulated firms, and whether governance rules can accommodate institutions operating under different supervisory regimes.
For now, the work remains a controlled proof of concept on a testnet. Its value lies in moving post-quantum planning from policy papers and cryptographic standards into institutional transaction flows, where the hard questions are likely to involve people, permissions and cross-border accountability as much as the signature algorithm itself.
Explore how digital assets are evolving alongside quantum-resistant cryptography in institutional finance and cross-border markets.
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.
