Posts
avatar

What should be done with bitcoins whose owner does not migrate to post-quantum signatures? BIP 361 proposes a gradual deprecation of ECDSA and Schnorr vulnerable paths. However, this is merely a proposal, not an adopted Bitcoin standard. Herein lies the more difficult part. Is it better to permanently disable the ability to spend such coins, or to leave it open and risk them being seized by someone with a sufficiently powerful quantum computer? Which approach better protects ownership?

This content is for informational and educational purposes only. It may include third-party insights, sponsored content, or promotional material for which the creator may receive compensation. Nothing in this feed constitutes investment advice or a guarantee of returns. You are solely responsible for your own investment decisions. Always conduct your own research and exercise caution before trading. We do not guarantee the accuracy of third-party information and are not liable for any losses incurred. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Please refer to our Community Terms and Risk Disclosure Statement for details.

avatarPost your reply

Comment