Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
TradFi
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Recently, Google released a study that caused quite a stir: they say that breaking Bitcoin's security now requires 20 times fewer quantum resources than previously thought. Of course, apocalyptic headlines immediately started circulating online, but honestly, this kind of panic appears every year or two. The difference this time is that it's backed by Google, so it sounds more terrifying.
Putting the drama aside, what really matters is understanding what's happening. The research team designed a quantum circuit that could theoretically derive your private key from your exposed public key in about 9 minutes. Sounds bad, right? Especially considering that Bitcoin generates blocks every 10 minutes. But here’s the important part: this requires a quantum computer with about 500,000 physical qubits. Google has the Willow chip with just 105 qubits. IBM is around 1,121. We're talking about hundreds of times less than what's needed.
What’s interesting is that Google advanced its internal deadline to migrate to post-quantum cryptography to 2029. Previously, it was 2030-2035. This basically says: hey, the threat is closer than we thought, start preparing. Justin Drake from the Ethereum Foundation calculated that the probability of a quantum computer capable of breaking ECDSA appearing before 2032 is only 10%. It’s not imminent, but it’s not negligible either.
So, what does this mean for Bitcoin? First, the threat is concentrated on digital signatures, not on the blockchain structure itself or mining. Quantum computing doesn’t make the mining mechanism obsolete. What it attacks is the signing process. There are two real risks: one during the transaction, where someone could intercept it before confirmation, and another targeting addresses whose public keys are already exposed. But this doesn’t affect all bitcoins or all users.
Regarding quantum mining, BTQ Technologies published a fascinating analysis on the same day. They found that mining with quantum computers would require 10 to the power of 8 physical qubits under the most favorable assumptions. With Bitcoin’s current difficulty, that jumps to 10 to the power of 23 qubits. To give you an idea, that’s comparable to the energy of a star. Currently, Bitcoin consumes between 13 and 25 gigawatts. Quantum mining is neither physically nor economically feasible. No one would spend that energy to obtain 3.125 bitcoins from a block.
The good news is that the industry already has a solution: post-quantum cryptography. NIST completed the standardization with algorithms like ML-DSA and SLH-DSA. At the Bitcoin level, BIP 360 was incorporated into the proposal repository in early 2026. This BIP modifies how the transaction structure works to reduce the exposure of public keys from the source, eliminating the route that currently exposes the key.
The reality is that Bitcoin is not a static system. It has constantly evolved: from script updates to Taproot, from privacy improvements to scalability solutions. Quantum challenges could simply be the reason for the next big upgrade. Although quantum computing is advancing faster than expected, we have enough time to respond. The clock is ticking, but we can all hear its sound. What matters now is that cryptographic infrastructure always stays one step ahead of technological threats. It’s not as urgent as headlines suggest, but it’s also not something we can ignore.