Changpeng Zhao proposes freezing Satoshi's bitcoins: protection against quantum threat
Binance founder Changpeng Zhao has made a radical proposal: give Satoshi Nakamoto 12 months to move his bitcoins before the network's quantum upgrade. If the coins are not moved, they are proposed to be frozen forever.
According to Zhao's estimate, only about 20 million coins will remain in the new protocol, as the rest will be locked. This describes the consequences of the proposed freezing of inactive wallets. Inaction on this issue, he says, is dangerous: if nothing is done, the coins will effectively go to whoever hacks them. This will happen as soon as quantum computing reaches the required level.
Protection from the quantum threat
This refers to wallets from the early period of Bitcoin, which are considered the most vulnerable. As quantum computers develop, traditional encryption methods may come under threat, which is the reason for Zhao's proposal. The idea is to protect vulnerable digital assets before they become accessible to attackers. A one-year window, according to Zhao, would give the owner of inactive coins the opportunity to transfer them to a secure format.
A similar idea was proposed in 2024
Previously, a similar proposal was made by Ava Labs CEO Emin Gün Sirer. He believes that quantum computing could pose a danger to outdated technologies. Wallets from Nakamoto's active period use the Pay-To-Public-Key (P2PK) format, which fully reveals the public key. Sirer stated that quantum computing would simplify performing some operations, such as number factorization, while other tasks would remain just as complex. Additionally, in his assessment, a quantum attacker has only a small window of opportunity for an attack, which complicates their work.
Sirer noted that modern wallets and systems like Avalanche do not use P2PK, but it was used in the early days of Bitcoin. Therefore, in his opinion, when quantum computing becomes a real threat, the community should consider freezing Satoshi's coins or, in general, set a deadline and freeze all coins in the P2PK format.
My analysis: The idea of preemptively freezing assets from early eras is a logical but highly controversial step. On one hand, it protects the network from a potential collapse when quantum computers can hack old wallets. On the other hand, it is a direct challenge to the principle of the inviolability of private keys and decentralization. If the community decides to take such a step, it will create a dangerous precedent where "consensus" can rewrite the basic rules of ownership. Personally, I believe that before freezing, a clear, long-term migration period and technical support for owners of old wallets must be provided. Otherwise, we risk undermining trust in the very foundation of Bitcoin.