The claim that quantum computers are currently stealing Bitcoin from dormant wallets, made by former Wall Street trader Josh Mandell, has sparked significant debate and pushback within the cryptocurrency community. Mandell alleges that a "large player" is secretly accumulating Bitcoin by exploiting quantum technology to access old, inactive wallets, particularly those belonging to deceased or inactive owners. He suggests this accumulation occurs without impacting the open market, making blockchain analysis the primary means of detection.
Mandell's assertion is based on the premise that quantum computers have advanced to a point where they can crack Bitcoin's cryptographic defenses, which classical computers cannot. Bitcoin's security relies on elliptic curve cryptography (ECC), which secures transactions using digital signatures and hash functions. Quantum computers, utilizing Shor's algorithm, could potentially break this cryptography by deriving private keys from exposed public keys, thus enabling the unauthorized spending of Bitcoin.
However, the overwhelming response from the Bitcoin community has been one of strong skepticism and rejection. Experts like Harry Beckwith, founder of Hot Pixel Group, and Matthew Pines, executive director of the Bitcoin Policy Institute, have dismissed Mandell's claims as highly unlikely and false, citing a lack of evidence.
A central point of contention is the current state of quantum computing technology. While quantum computing has made strides, including developments in qubit technology by companies like IBM and Google, it is still considered to be in its early stages. Experts generally agree that quantum computers are not yet powerful enough to pose an immediate threat to Bitcoin's security. Breaking Bitcoin's cryptography would require millions of stable, error-corrected qubits, a feat that is years, if not decades, away.
Despite the current lack of threat, the potential for quantum computers to compromise Bitcoin's security in the future is a recognized concern. The open-source nature of Bitcoin allows for the development and implementation of quantum-resistant cryptographic solutions. Researchers are actively working on post-quantum cryptography, which involves new types of algorithms inherently resistant to quantum attacks. Potential solutions include upgrading Bitcoin's public-key cryptosystems to these post-quantum alternatives.
Furthermore, Bitcoin's design offers some inherent defenses. The use of hashed addresses, for example, means that the public key is not directly revealed, adding a layer of protection. Additionally, the Bitcoin network can adapt and evolve to meet emerging threats. Some experts suggest that the most economically rational use of a quantum computer would be to dominate Bitcoin mining rather than disrupt the blockchain.
While Mandell's claims have raised awareness of the potential long-term threat of quantum computing, the consensus remains that it is not currently a concern. The industry is actively researching and developing quantum-resistant solutions, and the Bitcoin network is expected to evolve to maintain its security in the face of future technological advancements. For now, Mandell's claims remain speculative, highlighting the ongoing debate between early warnings of a quantum risk and the prevailing view that such fears are premature.
