Binance founder Changpeng Zhao has proposed freezing up to 1 million Bitcoin linked to Satoshi Nakamoto if those coins remain unmoved after a future transition to quantum-resistant cryptography.
Summary
- CZ proposed freezing inactive Bitcoin addresses after a future migration to quantum-resistant cryptography.
- His plan could affect up to 1 million BTC believed to be linked to Satoshi Nakamoto.
- Bitcoin developers remain divided between protecting vulnerable coins and preserving property rights.
Speaking during a June 18 appearance on the Galaxy Brains podcast hosted by Galaxy Research President Alex Thorn, Zhao said quantum computing does not pose an insurmountable threat to Bitcoin because quantum-resistant cryptographic systems already exist.
Zhao argued that the more difficult task would be coordinating a network-wide migration to those technologies if quantum computers eventually become capable of breaking Bitcoin’s current security model.
Speaking about Bitcoin addresses that have remained inactive for years, including those widely believed to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto, Zhao said the network should establish a migration period of roughly six to twelve months after any future upgrade to quantum-resistant cryptography.
Under his proposal, holders would be given time to move their coins to protected addresses before legacy addresses are retired.
If no movement occurs during that period, Zhao suggested the remaining Bitcoin should be frozen under the new protocol. He argued that allowing vulnerable addresses to remain active indefinitely could eventually result in quantum-capable attackers gaining access to coins whose owners are no longer participating in the network.
According to Zhao, such an outcome would create an unfair method of redistributing Bitcoin because ownership would effectively transfer to whoever first develops the ability to crack those addresses. He emphasized that the decision should not be his to make and said any change would need support from the Bitcoin community through consensus-driven processes.
Bitcoin developers remain divided over legacy coins
Zhao’s remarks arrive as Bitcoin developers, researchers, and advocates continue debating how the network should handle coins secured by older cryptographic standards.
According to a June report published by Coinbase’s advisory board, Bitcoin should begin preparing a migration path to post-quantum cryptography before quantum computers become a realistic threat.
The report, which includes contributions from Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake, states that quantum computers do not currently endanger Bitcoin but argues that planning ahead could reduce future disruption.
The report outlines one proposal that would establish a deadline for migrating coins protected by existing ECDSA and Schnorr signatures. Supporters cited in the report argue that freezing unmigrated coins could prevent future attackers from obtaining large amounts of Bitcoin and potentially affect market stability.
Critics cited in the same report take the opposite position. According to Coinbase’s advisory board, opponents argue that making dormant coins unspendable would amount to confiscating private property and would conflict with Bitcoin’s principles of immutability and user control.
Property rights concerns shape the debate
Among the most vocal critics of freezing dormant Bitcoin is Galaxy Digital’s Alex Thorn.
As crypto.news reported in May, Thorn said many Bitcoin developers and advocates believe Satoshi’s coins should remain untouched regardless of future technological developments. Thorn argued that the issue extends beyond technical security because changing ownership rights could weaken Bitcoin’s credibility as a neutral monetary system.
Discussing the risk posed by Satoshi’s holdings, Thorn noted that the estimated stash is distributed across roughly 22,000 addresses, many of which contain around 50 BTC. According to Thorn, that structure makes a large-scale quantum attack more difficult than some observers assume.
Thorn also warned that any attempt to override ownership rights could face resistance from Bitcoin users. He said some members of the community may prefer enduring a severe market decline rather than approving protocol changes that alter control over long-dormant wallets, including those associated with Bitcoin’s creator.
