The paper argues for a layer-specific approach to quantum risks in original Bitcoin, highlighting key vulnerabilities.
This paper argues that quantum risk in original Bitcoin is layer-specific rather than protocol-uniform. Using the November 2008 pre-release witness as its primary corpus, it separates authorization, proof-of-work, residual-state accounting, and timechain ordering. The clearest Shor-sensitive surface is authorization, where public-key signatures govern spending authority. Proof-of-work belongs to a different problem class: hash-target search, where Grover-class advantage changes search economics without becoming key recovery. Residual spendable state and accepted ordering are not themselves cryptographic secrets, though they may be affected indirectly if authorization or proof-of-work assumptions change. The paper does not claim that original Bitcoin is quantum-proof or provide a production post-quantum migration design. It argues instead that migration discussion should begin only after the protocol layers have been separated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
PARTH MAURIA SAXENA (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: