Founder of Solana Warns AI Could Break Post-Quantum Cryptography Schemes

Solana co-founder, Anatoly Yakovenko, considers artificial intelligence (AI) as the biggest imminent threat to crypto asset cryptography. He states that AI could crack post-quantum cryptography (PQC) signature schemes before the industry strengthens its security.

Bitcoin developers and analysts are now beginning to agree on the future quantum threat without disrupting Satoshi Nakamoto's ownership.

Yakovenko Advocates Multisig Defense for Post-Quantum Cryptography

Solana's co-founder believes that the industry has not fully understood the mathematical weaknesses or implementation flaws of PQC.

He wants wallets to combine multiple signature schemes with a two-out-of-three multisig system. This setup can be natively supported in Solana transaction processors via Program Derived Addresses.

“In my opinion, the biggest risk is that PQC signature schemes will be broken by AI. We don't even know all the traps on the implementation side, let alone the mathematics,” Yakovenko said.

Curve Finance founder Michael Egorov once asked whether formal verification could cover these vulnerabilities. However, Yakovenko believes verification only helps if developers already know exactly what needs to be verified.

He still prefers redundancy with two out of three independent schemes.

Bitcoiners Reach Early Consensus on Satoshi’s Coins

Alex Thorn, head of research at Galaxy Digital, says a consensus is beginning to form regarding Satoshi’s ownership. He cites several discussions held this week in Las Vegas with skeptics, supporters, and other Bitcoiners.

Estimated 1.1 million BTC
BTCUSD
owned by Satoshi are spread across about 22,000 P2PK addresses, each containing 50 BTC. Thorn explains that a long-range attack would need to breach each address individually. Meanwhile, exchanges could migrate to post-quantum addresses before the Q-day arrives.

He adds that the Bitcoin market can typically absorb selling pressure of over one million BTC. This indicates the network can still withstand worst-case scenarios without sacrificing core property rights of the network. 🎯🔥 Supra Dilemma: Structuring Futures Signals 🔥🎯
The market is in an unfavorable condition…

It’s not unreadable, but it’s unpleasant to execute ⚖️

⚔️ Two Options That Are Both “Uncomfortable”

🔴 SHORT?

📉 Price is already high

💡 Logically, “it should go down”

But…

🚫 Momentum remains strong

🚫 No valid reversal signs yet

👉 Short = going against the trend 🌊❌

🟢 LONG?

📈 Momentum is still rising

🔥 The trend remains strong

But…

⚠️ BTC is already at 80,000

⚠️ ETH is already at 2,400

👉 Long = chasing the price 🏃‍♂️❌

🧠 Supra’s decision

❌ Do not short

❌ Do not long

✅ ABSTAIN

🎯 Why abstain?

📊 No ideal entry point

⚖️ Risk ≈ Reward (imbalanced)

🧩 Structure does not yet provide an edge

👉 This is not about the direction…

👉 It’s about timing that’s not right yet

⚡ If you still want to enter?

👉 🟢 LONG > SHORT (safer)

Why?

✔️ In line with momentum

✔️ Not going against the trend

✔️ Risks are more controlled

🔥 Closing Supra

Trading isn’t always about entering…

but about entering at the right moment 🎯

Those who patiently wait…

usually get the best position 😈