Bitcoin Forum

Yeah BlackRock Issues Bitcoin Warning, Says BTC Source Code Could Be Rendered ‘Flawed or Ineffective’ by Quantum Computing

BlackRock, which is the first ever successful Bitcoin ETF, now holds over 275,000 Bitcoins, through its shares Bitcoin Trust (IBTT). Recenyl they raised a concern that Bitcoin source code and cryptographic security could be broken, if not now but in the future by quantum computers which impose a huge risk to how large they hold Bitcoin. The concern is specifically on how fast quantum computers can advance.

Actually, everything (emails, banks, treasury, https website, messaging/privacy apps, VPN etc) will be rendered flawed or ineffective by quantum computing.

Forbes (http://ttps://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2025/05/15/serious-blackrock-bitcoin-warning-fuels-fears-of-disaster-as-the-price-suddenly-dives/)
Cointelegraph (https://cointelegraph.com/explained/blackrock-issues-rare-warning-is-bitcoins-future-at-risk-from-quantum-tech)


Sources
THE DAILY HODL (https://dailyhodl.com/2025/05/26/blackrock-issues-bitcoin-warning-says-btc-source-code-could-be-rendered-flawed-or-ineffective-by-quantum-computing/)

They are not issuing a warning, they are adding legal protection for themselves. This is nothing new but again fake FUD by the media regarding an alleged risk posed by quantum computing. If quantum computers start becoming a thread, Bitcoin will move to new address formats. We are likely to have bigger issues from global events than this. Do you know that you can see articles like this every couple of months?

It is a fud attempt from BlackRock with hope of creating panic sell and dumping the market for their accumulation at cheaper prices. Did BlackRock do due diligent research about Bitcoin, fundamentally and technicaly before submit their Bitcoin Spot ETF application?

I emphasize about their Bitcoin Spot ETF application, not about their Bitcoin Spot ETF operation after approved in January 2024.

Your post shows that you are like a big fan of BlackRock and its Bitcoin Spot ETF or you are not their fan but seriously understood inaccurately about Bitcoin Spot ETF industry.

BlackRock Bitcoin Spot EFT was approved together with other Bitcoin Spot ETFs, on a same day in January 2024. So they are not a first successful Bitcoin Spot ETF!

True, quantum computing is a risk — but not just for Bitcoin. It’s a threat to all modern cryptography. The good news? Devs are already working on quantum-resistant algorithms. Bitcoin can adapt. The real question is: will governments and banks move that fast?

I also sense that there is an intention of then buying to accumulate more and this may just be a trick that they want to employ in making as many as possible to sell so that the market can be rented out to bear and they buy, then we see more all time highs and they got profitable at the cause, this institutions are very wise in their actions, some are just with the intention of causing the market to react on some of the news spread, because they understand how the bloggers could spread the information all over the social media causing FOMO.

This is a funny thread.  If it can break bitcoins encryption, it will have already long taken control of all the nukes on the planet, all the biolabs, everyone's bank accounts, etc.

In other words, we won't even notice.

They have to make all information available & be transparent to investors. In truth, if Quantum a Computing becomes a reality any time soon then Bitcoin will be far down the list in potential attack targets. Malicious actors would target banking, social security numbers, addresses, nuclear weapon activation codes. Bitcoin can be forked & Quantum resistant Bitcoin addresses will become a thing soon any way. Do not worry, Bitcoin will be fine.

It is not a practical risk, only a theoretical risk. It may not manifest for decades to come, nobody really knows right now.

The same fearmongering about quantum computers comes up, and the same arguments are provided to rebuke them. The cycle keeps repeating endlessly. I'm sure that if Bitcoin moved to quantum resistant addresses tomorrow, they would find another reason to spread FUD.

No this is not FUD by BlackRock. It's more of a insurance 
BlackRock gain nothing from creating FUD. They don't buy Bitcoin with their funds but that of investors
They are more like custodians and are paid a fee for holding your Bitcoin.

Nothing new the case about quantum threat has been ongoing before BlackRock made this statement
Which should some weeks ago.
If I have a quantum machine with such computing power Bitcoin wouldn't even be the top ten in my mind.
They made this to let investors know about potential risk not existing risk
Quantum machines ain't a threat to Bitcoin currently maybe in decades.

I do agree with you! It's not a FUD they are trying to create. It's more of an official statement that says - "if the Bitcoins that we hold for you, get stolen due to the advancement of quantum computing, you can't hold me responsible and can't expect me to refund you".

It's a technique big corporations use to safeguard themselves in case anything goes wrong. I can assure you that this statement will soon become a part of their T&Cs, if not added already.

A well decentralized system like Bitcoin is hack-proof unlike centralized entity like b'rock. It's hack-proof because its system is designed to be watched and validated by nodes of many people spread across the world, plus the combination of other useful features. It's not like a centralized system that's centrally watched or that exist on one or few locations.
By the way,  Bitcoin is not only secured physically, it's "extraordinarily" protected, and this means that before a hack happens in the physical sphere of existence it will first of all happen on "the other side". So, the quantum computer has to successfully breach the security of the other side before it succeeds physically. This is basically impossible as long as Bitcoin is more morally superior.

Decentralized systems are generally difficult to hack, as long as they operate within these most important principles of Bitcoin below, which from our observation have to be applied together to improve the security of a decentralized system and their participants.
 
* Decentralization:  don't centralized control, power, verification and validation/approval.

* Transparency/opensource: Keep it transparent enough for anyone to monitor and contribute to solving issues.

* Immutablity: There should always be exact records of all data/info. They should be unchangeable or undeletable. People can always refer to them when needed, they can serve as evidence when something goes wrong, or they can repopulate another platform when the other stops existing etc

* Trustlessness: Don't trust but verify

* Permissionless: the barrier to entry should be low to allow anyone to join, contribute and use.

* Censorship resistant:  Info/data should be censorship proof (unless they prevent the system/network from working properly), individuals can choose to block or avoid it and its creator

* Reputation: use this to limit dishonest participants

* Anonymity/privacy: protect the identity of honest participants

* Unlimited accounts or multiple points of control: It's important not to have all your valuable in one account. Try to split them into multi accounts. This is especially helpful against hacks or attack from things like quantum computers.

* Data/assets control and distribution: it's important to self custody your assets/data and only import or access them where you want to use them, like on wallets, websites etc.

im a bitcoin maximalist, but a realist, i dont fear informing people of the risks aswell as benefits. people should be made aware of risks as much as benefits.. just spouting the benefits or the old verbage of promotional buzzwords doesnt always help. making people aware of risks helps people then be aware and not let things slide in unnoticed

CORE, hints literally in the name.. everyone relies on, and trusts in one dev-political-hierarchy aligned group

analogy
if a newspapers pages can be open and read, but the closed room board of news editors control the stories narative/political leaning, and only allow people to contribute mostly to grammar mistakes.. is the newspaper truly open and transparent

pruned, stripped, non archival
validation bypass: assume valid, isvalid

assumevalid, isvalid
moderations of most technical discussion platforms are the very same devs that are the dev politicians of core

free to use the software, but participate in any meaningful technical development, bow your head kiss the ring of core
nominations: Nack
look into whom gets to be a maintainer and have 'force-merge', 'self-merge' status

legacy depreciation

Exactly what I'm thinking as well, they are just trying to safeguard nothing more.

As for the quantum computing risk, it's all still speculation, none of quantum computer are functional enough to break the encryption at least until few decades.

But the solution is coming up, bitcoin isn't stagnating, it will upgrade its security and respond to such threat.

Just-In: BlackRock Breaks Acccumulation Streak, Moves $429M In Bitcoin To Coinbase Prime
After nearly a month of Bitcoin purchases, BlackRock has transferred a sizable amount of BTC to Coinbase Prime, sparking sell-off fears.
https://coingape.com/blackrock-breaks-acccumulation-streak-moves-429m-in-bitcoin-to-coinbase-prime/
BlackRock has moved $429M in Bitcoin to a centralized exchange hinting at a potential sale.
The move follows a consistent accumulation spree that saw ETF inflows reach record highs.
Bitcoin price has slipped below the $105K mark as market sentiment sheds optimism.
BlackRock has broken its streak of steady Bitcoin accumulation after it deposited 4,113 BTC on Coinbase Prime. The outflow is stoking fears of a massive selloff, sending the largest cryptocurrency prices tumbling below $105K.

And long before this happens there will be technical changes made to prevent it from being a catastrophe.  As above, it is legal protection by disclosing risks, nothing more.  Certainly some people are using it as FUD, but there are alt coins (e.g. ether) that are much more susceptible to quantum risks due to design choices.  They are the canary in the coal mine.

BlackRock Offloads $130M Bitcoin & Accumulates $69M ETH
https://coingape.com/blackrock-offloads-130m-bitcoin-accumulates-69m-eth/
BlackRock shifts $561M in BTC, adds $69M in ETH as ETF inflows favor Ethereum over Bitcoin amid market rebalancing and price dip.
BlackRock moved 5,362 BTC worth $561M to Coinbase while buying 27,241 ETH.
iShares Bitcoin Trust saw $561M in ETF outflows between May 30–June 2.
Ethereum ETFs posted 11 straight days of inflows, totaling $3.12B so far.
BlackRock has shifted $130 million worth of Bitcoin while increasing its Ethereum holdings with a $69 million purchase. The movement took place between May 30 and June 2 and aligns with major outflows from BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust.

It's publicly known that ECDSA/secp256k1 cryptography used by Bitcoin isn't secure against Bitcoin QC. So i feel either BlackRock or news media decide to perform fearmonger for reason i don't know. Frankly, i would


FYI, Bitcoin doesn't use encryption cryptography wheres Bitcoin actually use signature and hash cryptography instead.

And BTC wouldn't be a first target for such attacks, so.. There is a problem, but it's not like it's the end of the world.

It wouldn't be bad if you start using some better sources, because it looks like you've woken up from a long sleep and you're quite behind on real data.


https://www.blackrock.com/us/individual/products/333011/ishares-bitcoin-trust


Everyone is afraid of quantum computers, but apparently very few people realize that it will be a long time before such computers are powerful enough to compromise the cryptography that protects not only BTC but everything else in digital form. I've never liked them and companies like them, especially when it's an open secret that they're there for profit and don't care 1% about BTC.

What's the next news? BR propose a BTC hard fork that will be resistant to quantum computers?

If they (BR) had truly concerned about this, they would have ignored Bitcoin rather than invested their money in it and other resources for Bitcoin Spot ETF application and operations with many related products and issues later.

They know that quantum computers are threats in future (but probably not near future) so they only wanted to create fud that, in their hope, can trigger market crash. So they can take advantage of panic in the crowd and consequent market crash for buying bitcoin at cheaper price.

Frankly, if they truly worried about it, they would silently make their exit from Bitcoin market to maximize total capital they can get back.

In reality, they did oppositely than all above things, so it's not their true concern at all.

So now they're the experts in Blockchain network security? QC isn't even a threat and BlackRock is seriously concerned about Bitcoin? Really? I think this is nothing more than FUD. Probably a strategy for market prices to dip a little bit for them to buy more Bitcoin. AFAIK, developers are already working on a solution against a possible QC attack in the future. Once the solution gets the "green light" from the community (nodes + miners), Bitcoin will already be one step ahead of the game. Even now, it's hard to crackdown on Bitcoin's security due to the ever-increasing network hashrate. The more miners there are, the harder it will be to disrupt the Bitcoin blockchain.

For what I know, Bitcoin is the most secure digital currency system on Earth. The source code is open to anyone, so it's easy to fix Bitcoin's "flaws". I sure hope BlackRock doesn't get directly involved in the development process (by bribing/blackmailing Bitcoin core developers), or Bitcoin will be doomed. We can't tell what will happen in the future, so anything's possible.

You are right about transparency for investors and how threat of quantum computing to Bitcoin is mostly exaggerated. If quantum computers become powerful enough to break today security much bigger targets like national security systems or banks or vital infrastructure would be attacked first not Bitcoin. Plus Bitcoin can change and adapt its open source nature means developers can create quantum resistant addresses and other upgrades to deal with future risks. So while quantum attacks are theoretically possible they are not immediate worry and Bitcoin ability to evolve makes its future secure.

If BlackRock are so worried about quantum computing, why don't they sell all their 275,000 BTC? Issuing a statement about "being worried" while keeping all your BTC means only one thing. Spreading FUD on the markets. Most of the victims of this FUD are going to be newbie investors, who know very little about Bitcoin and quantum computing. I'm sure that Bitcoin is about to change and it will definitely survive the "quantum computers era". Maybe the guys at BlackRock should do more research about the subject, before issuing statements.

Quantum attack is still far away, from what I've heard most of quantum computer still have high error rate and still impractical.

I will only be concerned when error rate is already low but a precaution is definitely needed, as of now I just think that those threat about quantum computing is still overblown.

Why is BlackRock so concerned about Bitcoin's code, but not at all worried about the money sitting in their bank accounts? Both BTC private keys and fiat account access are protected by the same class of cryptographic algorithms.

If I had a quantum computer, I’d start by cracking bank accounts — simply because that’s where the bigger money is. ;D

Good old quantum computers FUD. Already debunked many times before. Blackrock makes it like they just discovered something new. No, the idea has been around for nearly a decade. More importantly, if quantum computing cracks SHA256 which is the cryptography algorithm bitcoin uses, every bank account will be in danger too. I don’t see blackrock releasing fud on their own products which got me thinking, are they doing this intentionally? Of course they do. And the reason is simple. They want to buy more before the rocket ship takes off.

For me, it's because any compromised private keys immediately result in irreversible loss, unlike bank accounts that have institutional safeguards like fraud detection and legal recourse.
So for sure, if you are a criminal, maybe you may have a high chance of not getting caught using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and at the same time having difficulty to success too.

Bitcoin blockchain is irreversible as are Bitcoin transactions, then any loss in bitcoin is forever loss and can not be recovered without any legal case and arrest on the criminal behind it that usually does not happen for most of victims.

Banks from central banks to commercial banks and bank transfers to bank accounts sound like safer but this safety comes after you already put your fund to banks and trust them. While you sacrifice your fund safety at the very first step, later steps are no longer too much important because you can firstly lose your money to banks, governments before risk of loss to criminals.

Maybe you are right, but still - I do think first targets would be something bigger than BTC, and what's bigger than said amounts in the banks, even if they are protected, such groups (hackers, etc.) are already hiding themselves good enough to continue to do what they do..

There's a typo here "cryptography used by Bitcoin isn't secure against Bitcoin "
Yes, the purpose of their statement was to cause FUD which is always their instrucment of accumulating the dip because this is something that have been discussed before they even think of accumulating Bitcoin.

That's correct. However, before we see the quantum computer that will impact cryptography through the draining of all utxo with known public keys, it will be at least 50-100 years from now, and if the computer is developed, Bitcoin is the least of the ecosystems that will be affected because the military, institutional banks, etc, are not left out.
Meanwhile, I believe that won't be the case since technology are advancing everyday.

Why ignore something that could bring big profits? As far as I remember, they have been approved for over 400 ETFs so far, so it's obvious that they will try to make money on anything, and BTC is a real money factory for them for now. I don't really think they want to bring down the price this way, they just need to say something, even if it's completely pointless at this point.


Maybe it looked like I was joking about the hard fork, but when the spot BTC ETF was approved, information came out in which they made a statement about the hard fork - and if my memory serves me well, they wrote something like "in the case of a hard fork, BR will not necessarily follow the chain that the majority (crypto community) will follow", which implies that they will support what is in their interest - and when we add to that that they bought majority shares in the biggest BTC mining companies, things don't look very good for BTC.

That is why membership of a forum like this could help one in overcoming FUD. Blackrock knows that these threats are not currently a problem to the Bitcoin system but they just want to promote FuD or inform investors about a potential risk. The market didn't react massively to this FUD because many people are aware that Quantum computers pose no immediate harm.  I am also glad to know that Bitcoin developers are already aware of this threat and will definitely work hard to curtail this threat. Anyways, hands have dumped cheap coins for whales to accumulate more.

I've fixed it. Thanks for mentioning it.


1. How do you know bank actually use ECDSA/secp256k1 that used by Bitcoin?
2. Unlike Bitcoin, bank theoretically can reverse the transaction and freeze involved bank account.

Let's not forget that government systems also rely on SHA-256 encryption. They will be affected if QCs manage to successfully crack Bitcoin. Before QCs ever become a threat, Bitcoin Core developers will already have a solution implemented. BTC is much safer than banks, so why the worry?

Like I've said, BlackRock is only spreading FUD with the hopes of seeing BTC drop in market prices. Then, they will buy it "cheap" to resell once prices go all the way to the moon. We cannot underestimate the power of "Wall Street". So long as these giants don't buy up all of the BTC, there should be nothing to worry about.

if people do not want to be situationally aware(so they know what to look out for should worse case happens).. usually the worse case does happen and people act surprised and upset after the fact
EG most people are not situationally aware that core is trying to depreciate the utility of legacy keys..

if people want to remain complacent and think bitcoin is utopia, they become complacent to not review code, become complacent to just blind trust core dev decisions which affect bitcoin(which affect everyone)

the whole point of bitcoin is that it should be decentralised and also peer reviewed independently and developed/upgraded independently via the masses. if people just want to dismiss the issues. the issues can get worse

i am a bitcoin maximalist. i adore and have a good hoard of coin for well over a decade.. and yet im a realist to know the risks, and i ensure i highlight the risks so that it is no surprise when or if things happen
(mentioning in 2016 (pre-segwit) how segwit will cause bloated unvalidated junk to be on the blockchain.. fastforward 2023.. 'ordinals' crap proved it)

blackrock are the same they are not naive to the risks, and also they have to legally make statements of risks for their own customers risk mitigation/management/liability stuff. they cant just do the fluffy cloud utopian promotion when they have legal obligations

people should not just dream of the fluffy cloud utopian dreams but keep their feet in reality and try to be part of mitigating the risks that can affect bitcoin, or atleast be aware of the risks so they can react to changes before they become a negative effect on bitcoin.

1. Banks use RSA or Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC), which, like ECDSA, are vulnerable to Shor’s quantum algorithm. Hackers could intercept traffic (MITM attacks) and decrypt it using quantum-powered TLS attacks, or gain access to data by hacking servers that rely on vulnerable keys.

2. While banks can freeze transfers, they can only do so before the funds reach the recipient’s account. Handling a return on an international transfer, especially to an offshore bank, can be even more complicated.



Then why is it that most illicit funds are still laundered through fiat rather than cryptocurrencies? Why do North Korean hackers manage to easily cash out their stolen crypto through fiat channels?

I mean, they're not wrong. But according to the Bitcoin-dev mailing list, there are already discussions about a new quantum-resistant address type.

I do not think that SHA256d blocks are going to be broken by quantum computers, but in case it ever becomes a threat that people can suddenly pre-mine 100,000s of blocks, then I would see a soft fork in the style of Segwit on the table.

Bitcoin ETF Inflows Approach $1 Billion This Week, BlackRock’s IBIT Dominates
https://coingape.com/bitcoin-etf-inflows-approach-1-billion-this-week-blackrock-ibit-dominates/
BlackRock Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) has seen more than $900 million in inflows this week while challenging the Gold ETF inflows.
BlackRock Bitcoin ETF assets under management (AUM) have surged to $73 billion despite Bitcoin's price decline.
IBIT is increasingly challenging traditional market leaders like Gold ETFs.
Bloomberg analyst predicts Bitcoin ETF AUM could eventually triple that of Gold ETFs, surpassing $1 trillion.
Inflows into spot Bitcoin ETF have reached closer to $1 billion in the first four trading days this week, with BlackRock iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT)  dominating most of the flows. This shows a strong pick-up in BTC institutional interest, despite the BTC price being on a falling trajectory this week. Amid continuous inflows, the AUM for IBIT has now crossed $73 billion.

This risk assessment is kind of obligatory to be disclosed to their customer so it's not really a FUD just acknowledgement of the risk.
I'm sure quantum computer affect other, not only bitcoin, if they were to risk assess other tech company that rely on encryption all of them will be flawed when QC is functional.

Maybe you're right. But why make it public, though? Can't they just announce it to their customers only?

Anyways, I've been doing some digging and found out the Chinese have already broken through the RSA encryption used by banks. More info on that here: https://www.livescience.com/technology/computing/chinese-scientists-claim-they-broke-rsa-encryption-with-a-quantum-computer-but-theres-a-catch (https://www.livescience.com/technology/computing/chinese-scientists-claim-they-broke-rsa-encryption-with-a-quantum-computer-but-theres-a-catch)

So that means if China used QC to break through the RSA encryption algorithm, they can also target ECDSA used by Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Developers better act fast before it's too late. The initial proposal of hard forking Bitcoin to create new "Quantum-resistant addresses" would be met with opposition from the community. Especially when it will leave existing cold storage wallets and loaded physical collectibles in the dust. Integrating Lamport Signatures or any other QC-resistant algorithm would be the way to go. But that's just my opinion.

Ultimately, the community will decide the fate of Bitcoin. Not BlackRock, nor any other big, centralized entity. Perhaps, BTC will survive a QC attack. But I can't say the same about altcoins. We'll see what happens in the long run.