Watchlist 0
BITCOIN · L1 · STAGE 2 ACKNOWLEDGED · QRI 33 v3.2.2 methodology
In plain terms

What it is. Bitcoin is the original digital money, and it has written detailed plans for surviving a future code-breaking computer, yet none of them are switched on yet.

What we found. Roughly a million coins that have not moved since Bitcoin's earliest days, including the founder's, sit in a form their owners can no longer protect, and the community has not agreed whether to freeze them, let people slowly rescue them, or leave them exposed.

Why it matters. If a code-breaking computer arrives before that decision is made, those long-dormant coins could be stolen, and big institutions that hold Bitcoin would already be past the deadlines their own rulebooks set for fixing this.

Bitcoin has a deep published specification lineage (BIP-360, BIP-361, Hourglass V2, BTQ testnet, PACT, OP_CHECKSHRINCS) and zero PQ primitives shipped on mainnet. The cold P2PK cohort (~1.7M BTC, ~1M of which is Satoshi-era) cannot be migrated by its owners and is structurally unrescuable absent a Phase-C zk-recovery path; burn-vs-rescue is undeclared.

inLinkedIn Audit access Compare Last reviewed 2026-08-20

Summary

Bitcoin scores QRI 33, Band 4 Architected, Migration Stage 2. Mainnet runs ECDSA secp256k1 / Schnorr secp256k1 (BIP-340) with SHA-256d and RIPEMD-160 hashing; BIP-324 transport uses ECDH on secp256k1. Every active asymmetric primitive is Shor-vulnerable. Project Eleven estimates ~6.9M BTC (~33% of supply) at quantum-vulnerable addresses with public keys visible on-chain; ~1.7M BTC sits in P2PK scripts with ~1M attributable to Satoshi-era outputs. BIP-360 is Draft; BIP-361 was merged into bitcoin/bips on 2026-04-14 but remains Draft per BIP-process. Hourglass V2 proposes a rate-limited canary at consensus level (~1 BTC/block from P2PK outputs), still on a personal fork. Trezor Safe 7 ships SLH-DSA-SHA2-128s for firmware signing, a shipped post-quantum firmware-signing path in a hardware wallet. mainnet-traffic cap binds at 5a=0%, the Architecture-Execution Gap is 38, and Migration Stage caps at 2 because milestones lack enforcement-mechanism backing. The headline governance signal is undeclared burn-vs-rescue: the public split between freeze (BIP-361), optional migration, rate-limit canary, and zk-rescue research has no coordinating authority.

Dominant quantum risk

Forge. Forge-dominant: this chain secures value and operations with signatures, so the principal quantum risk is forgery of spends/attestations once Shor breaks the curve. There is no harvest-now component for forgery, the public key alone enables it. Decrypt/HNDL applies only to transport/RPC confidentiality.

Forge subtotal 15 / Decrypt subtotal 8
Announced → Shipped

11 announced 0 shipped on mainnet under a named primitive. >1.5 deduction.

LayerQu scores deployment, not announcements. Announcements score zero.

Vulnerable supply

  • Exposed, pubkey visible: ~6.9M BTC (~33% of circulating supply) at quantum-vulnerable addresses with public keys visible on-chain
  • Exposed from creation: ~1.7M BTC in P2PK scripts (pubkey never hashed); ~1M attributable to Satoshi-era outputs
  • Exposed after spend, still funded: ~5M BTC in hash-pubkey schemes (P2PKH/P2WPKH/P2SH) whose pubkey was revealed in a past spend and still holds UTXOs
  • Never revealed, mitigated: majority of supply (~65%) in hash-pubkey addresses never spent; pubkey not yet revealed, mitigated until first spend
  • Permanently unmovable / dormant: ~1M Satoshi-era P2PK plus a long tail of lost keys; Chainalysis estimates 2.3-3.7M BTC (11-19%) may be permanently lost (overlaps the exposed cohort)

The ~6.9M figure is EXPOSURE (visible pubkey), not 'cannot be migrated'. Owner-controlled exposed coins can move to a PQ-safe output once one exists; only the dormant/lost cohort (~1M+ Satoshi-era) is structurally unmovable by its owners.

What the gates say

  • Gate 1a, Hybrid signature: FAIL , no hybrid signature composition active on mainnet; BIP-360 OR-composition is Draft only) Recorded as FAIL, not N/A: Gate 1a-Sig defines PASS and FAIL only, and a composition that exists solely as a draft does not satisfy it.
  • Gate 1a, Hybrid KEM: COND , Bitcoin has no validator-gossip KEM/PK-encryption surface; BIP-324 uses ECDH but is not classified as a TLS/relay KEM in the rubric sense
  • Gate 1b, Commit-to-hash: COND , no live OR-composition; BIP-360 spec includes Merkle-root commit-to-hash construction which would satisfy 1b on activation
  • Gate 2, Evidence reconstruction: PASS , every sub-score has ≥3 public artifacts; reconstructible in 48h
  • Gate 3, Primitive naming: PASS , every sub-score names exact primitives

Burn-vs-rescue policy on file

Declared option f, Undeclared. Bitcoin has no unified policy. Active public split: freeze/burn (BIP-361 three-phase sunset), optional migration (~10-year voluntary window), rate-limit canary (Hourglass V2), and STARK-rescue/zk-recovery (Phase C of BIP-361, research only; PACT is a second, independent zk-rescue branch proposing a private commitment plus future STARK-proof rescue path for dormant coins, itself requiring its own soft fork). The lack of declaration discipline is itself an evaluable signal, governance lacks a coordinating authority.

Seven dimensions

Each dimension scores 0–100 internally; the weighted roll-up produces the QRI.

1 Cryptographic Exposure weight 15% 46 / 100
1a · primitive inventory 18 / 20

Bitcoin Core publicly names every cryptographic primitive in active use. Deduction: BIP-360 candidate primitives (ML-DSA / SLH-DSA / FN-DSA) are listed in draft only, not active mainnet primitives.

Primitives: ECDSA secp256k1 (legacy/SegWit signatures, BIP-66/BIP-141) · Schnorr secp256k1 (Taproot, BIP-340) · SHA-256d (block headers, Merkle root, BIP-9 commitments) · RIPEMD-160 (P2PKH/P2WPKH/P2SH address hash via HASH160) · HMAC-SHA512 (BIP-32 child key derivation) · ChaCha20-Poly1305 (BIP-324 v2 transport AEAD) · X25519/secp256k1-ECDH (BIP-324 handshake)
1b · shor grover pq tag 16 / 20

Every active asymmetric primitive is Shor-vulnerable. The encrypted-transport handshake uses ECDH, so even peer-to-peer link confidentiality has HNDL exposure for any future post-quantum adversary.

Tags:
  • ECDSA secp256k1 Shor-break-via-DL-without-pairings
  • Schnorr secp256k1 (BIP-340) Shor-break-via-DL-without-pairings
  • SHA-256d Grover-weaken (256→128-bit)
  • RIPEMD-160 Grover-weaken (160→80-bit, classically still infeasible)
  • ChaCha20-Poly1305 PQ-safe symmetric AEAD
  • X25519/secp256k1-ECDH (BIP-324 handshake) Shor-break-via-DL-without-pairings
1c · family diversity 0 / 20

Bitcoin currently deploys zero PQ algorithm families on mainnet. BIP-360 proposes lattice (ML-DSA), with FN-DSA and SLH-DSA as secondary candidates, but none are merged into Bitcoin Core. Diversity Cap is not yet triggered because lattice-monoculture has not shipped; if BIP-360 ships ML-DSA without a hash-based fallback, the cap fires.

1d · nist security category 0 / 20

BIP-360 draft text references ML-DSA (FIPS 204), SLH-DSA (FIPS 205) and FN-DSA candidate parameter sets but does not select a final category for mainnet. No mainnet output uses a NIST PQC parameter set today.

1e · implementation quality 12 / 20

libsecp256k1 has constant-time scalar/point operations, deterministic nonces (RFC 6979), and ongoing fuzzing/Coq-style spec work; one of the most-reviewed ECC libraries in production. Cryptanalytic tier 1 for ECDSA/Schnorr secp256k1 and SHA-256. BIP-324 uses standard ChaCha20-Poly1305 (RFC 8439). No formally-verified PQ implementation has shipped to Bitcoin Core. The BTQ Bitcoin Quantum testnet v0.3.0 ships Dilithium opcodes outside the Core review process, which lowers tier confidence.

2 Quantum Recovery Exposure weight 10% 23 / 100
Forge subtotal: 15/75 Decrypt subtotal: 8/25
2a · active key exposure 5 / 25

Bitcoin's UTXO model exposes pubkeys at varying rates by output type. P2TR (Taproot key-path) outputs publish the 32-byte x-only pubkey directly in the scriptPubKey, these are actively exposed. P2PKH/P2WPKH outputs hash the pubkey; pubkey is revealed only when spent. Address reuse, mempool revelation, and P2PK outputs all lift exposure. Project Eleven estimates ~6.9 million BTC at quantum-vulnerable addresses with public keys visible on-chain (~33% of supply). Of that, ~1.7 million BTC sits in P2PK scripts, including roughly 1 million BTC attributable to ~20,000 Satoshi-era P2PK outputs.

2b · cold key exposure 5 / 25

Cold-key exposure is the dominant Bitcoin Forge surface. Project Eleven counts ~1 million BTC concentrated in 11 addresses (Satoshi-era P2PK), plus a long tail of ~20,000 individual P2PK keys totaling ~1.7M BTC. These outputs have had public keys visible on-chain since 2009-2010 and many have not moved for 15+ years, making Y for these holders effectively infinite, they cannot be migrated by their owners. The headline driver of BIP-361 and Hourglass V2 (rate-limit) proposals.

2c · sig long term validity 5 / 25

Bitcoin signatures retain validity indefinitely in the UTXO model, there is no expiry. Any output script with an exposed pubkey is forgeable forever post-Shor unless the UTXO is moved to a PQ-safe output type. X = effectively infinite for the cold cohort. Structurally worse than account-based chains where rotated keys can invalidate prior signatures.

2d · encryption confidentiality hndl 8 / 25

BIP-324 uses ECDH-secp256k1 handshake and ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD. The handshake is Shor-vulnerable; harvested handshakes and link traffic could be retroactively decrypted. RPC over TLS uses standard classical KEMs unless operators deploy hybrid KEM at the load-balancer layer. No protocol-level PQ KEM is documented for Bitcoin's transport. Mitigating factor: Bitcoin link traffic is largely block/tx propagation already mirrored on-chain in plaintext, so the privacy delta from HNDL is small relative to validator gossip on PoS chains.

3 Metadata, Anonymity & Confidentiality weight 13% 36 / 100
3a · tx graph visibility 6 / 20

Bitcoin is pseudonymous UTXO. Public chain analytics (Chainalysis, Arkham, mempool.space) cluster addresses with high recall. Off-chain mixers (CoinJoin, Wasabi 2.x, JoinMarket) provide partial unlinkability for users who opt in. No protocol-level shielded set.

3b · rpc mempool concentration 12 / 20

Bitcoin nodes are widely self-hosted (~20K reachable nodes). Top-3 RPC providers (mempool.space, blockstream.info, self-hosted Electrum servers) less concentrated than EVM RPC. Mempool gossip is observable via any full node. Validator metadata retention does not apply (PoW). Mining pool concentration is high: Foundry USA ~25.6%, AntPool ~19.8%, ViaBTC ~10-11%; combined top-3 ~55%, with a March 2026 reorg event illustrating concentration risk.

3c · cross chain bridge correlation 9 / 20

WBTC (BitGo custody, Ethereum), tBTC (decentralized, threshold ECDSA), and Lightning Network are the dominant Bitcoin bridges/L2s. WBTC mints/burns are fully traceable through the BitGo merchant flow. tBTC uses a t-ECDSA signing group and is publicly auditable. Lightning provides off-chain unlinkability for routed payments but channel open/close are on-chain.

3d · retroactive de anonymization 6 / 20

Shor on secp256k1 exposes pubkeys behind every previously-spent P2PKH/P2WPKH output, plus all P2TR outputs by construction. Address-clustering heuristics already perform near-complete de-anonymization for non-CoinJoin users; PQ does not add catastrophic anonymity loss but removes the small remaining privacy buffer for cold P2PKH addresses.

3e · mixnet shuffle 3 / 20

No protocol-level mixnet. Off-chain CoinJoin coordinators (Wasabi 2.x, JoinMarket) provide opt-in shuffling, wallet-layer only. Samourai Whirlpool was shut down in 2024.

4 Migration Architecture weight 10% 56 / 100
4a · crypto agility 6 / 15

Bitcoin requires a soft fork to introduce new output types or signature schemes. Historical cadence: SegWit (2017, ~2 years to activation), Taproot (2021, ~3 years from BIP-340 to activation). BIP-360 P2MR is structured as a soft fork adding a new SegWit version 2 output type, the canonical agility path. There is no algorithm-switch primitive comparable to EIP-7702.

4b · aa key rotation 4 / 20

No account abstraction. UTXO model has no native key rotation, users must spend from old outputs to new addresses, which itself reveals the pubkey at spend time. Client-layer PQ wrappers (e.g., commitment-to-PQ-pubkey schemes proposed in BIP-360 discussions) are spec-only. Migration burden falls entirely on individual UTXO holders.

4c · hard fork track record 11 / 15

Strong record of soft-fork upgrades under contested conditions. SegWit 2017 (UASF activation under block-size-war pressure) and Taproot 2021 (Speedy Trial signaling) both shipped without chain split. Block-size war (2015-2017) demonstrated coordination capability under adversarial pressure. Cadence is conservative, typically 2-4 years from BIP draft to activation.

4d · hybrid deployment readiness 9 / 15

BIP-360 P2MR is hybrid by construction, a new output type alongside existing P2PKH/P2WPKH/P2TR. Old UTXOs remain spendable under classical ECDSA/Schnorr; new UTXOs commit to a Merkle root over PQ pubkeys. The canonical Gate 1a-Sig OR-composition pattern. Gate 1b (commit-to-hash) is satisfied by the Merkle-root commitment. Status: Draft, not active.

4e · stateful hash state management 15 / 15

BIP-360 candidate primitives are stateless (ML-DSA, SLH-DSA, FN-DSA). No stateful hash scheme (XMSS, LMS) is in scope. Default 15/15 per v3.1 rule.

4f · bft aggregation path n/a, not in scope, weight redistributed

N/A, Nakamoto PoW, no BLS aggregation in consensus. Not scored, so it is left out of the dimension total rather than counted as a zero.

5 Deployment Execution weight 22% 18 / 100
5a · mainnet pqc traffic pct 0 / 25

Zero PQC primitives on Bitcoin mainnet as of 2026-05-01. BIP-360 is Draft; BIP-361 is Draft (merged into bitcoin/bips 2026-04-15). No mainnet PQ output type. BTQ Bitcoin Quantum testnet v0.3.0 ships Dilithium opcodes but is testnet-only and outside Bitcoin Core.

5b · pqc code in consensus client 2 / 15

Zero PQ code merged in Bitcoin Core. External BTQ Bitcoin Quantum client (forked from Core) ships Dilithium opcodes on testnet v0.3.0. Not in mainline.

5c · validator pqc key adoption n/a, not in scope, weight redistributed

PoW network, no validator set. Miners run SHA-256d unchanged; their per-block signature is over block-reward transactions using ECDSA secp256k1, not PQ. Not scored: there is no key-holding block producer here, so there is no validator key to adopt. Left out of the dimension total rather than counted as a zero. Post-quantum user-transaction signing is measured in 5a.

5d · published dated milestones 0 / 10

VOIDED to 0 per v3.1 (5a=0 forces Milestone-Discipline cap). Bitcoin does have multiple dated artifacts, BIP-360 entered the BIPs repository on 2026-02-11 (Draft); BIP-361 was merged 2026-04-15 with three-phase sunset; BTQ Bitcoin Quantum testnet v0.3.0 March 2026; Hourglass V2 spec on personal GitHub. None are enforcement-mechanism-backed.

5e · pqc washing delta 8 / 15

Announced PQC artifacts in trailing 12 months: BIP-360, BIP-361, Hourglass V2, BTQ testnet v0.3.0, Project Eleven Q-Day Prize publicity, Project Eleven's 2026 quantum-threat report, industry-press Bitcoin PQ commentary, Trezor Safe 7 firmware-signing, PACT, OP_CHECKSHRINCS, an unreviewed third-party ZK-freeze claim. Shipped on mainnet: zero. Bitcoin's published artifacts are technically grounded BIPs and explicitly labelled Draft or research-only; estimated ratio ~10-11 announced-to-shipped, qualifying for the >1.5 deduction band but below the >5.0 narrative-only tag.

5f · signature footprint multiplier 5 / 20

BIP-360 references ML-DSA-44 (~2,420-byte signature, ~1,312-byte pubkey), SLH-DSA-128s (~7,856 bytes), FN-DSA-512 (~666 bytes). Versus current Bitcoin Schnorr 64-byte signature, multipliers fall in the 10-125× range raw bytes. Adjusted to vbytes via SegWit witness discount, BIP-360 estimates ~5-7× block-cost increase per spend for ML-DSA.

6 Supply Chain Vendor Readiness weight 22% 23 / 100
6a · wallet 9 / 25

Top-3 Bitcoin custody wallets by user volume include Ledger, Trezor, a major-exchange wallet (custodial-adjacent); active hardware-wallet leaders are Trezor, Ledger, Coldcard. Trezor Safe 7 ships SLH-DSA-SHA2-128s in hybrid with Ed25519 for firmware-signing and boot verification, a shipped post-quantum firmware signing path (firmware, not user transactions). Ledger Donjon published 2026 PQC research analysis but has not announced a product PQC roadmap.

6b · bridge 3 / 25

Top-3 Bitcoin bridges: WBTC (BitGo-custodied), tBTC (threshold-ECDSA, Threshold Network), Lightning Network. Zero have published PQC roadmaps. WBTC depends on BitGo. tBTC uses threshold ECDSA, same secp256k1 vulnerability. Lightning channels use ECDSA-secp256k1 commitment transactions and ECDH for onion routing (Sphinx).

6c · custodian 8 / 25

Top-3 institutional Bitcoin custodians: a tier-1 US custodian, BitGo, Fidelity Digital Assets. Fireblocks has publicly committed to publishing a full PQC strategy document later in 2026 covering certificate, TLS, and MPC migration. a tier-1 US custodian committed in April 2026 to launching quantum-proof institutional custody by late 2026 (not dated more precisely). BitGo and Fidelity have no public PQC migration timetable.

6d · rpc hsm tee infra 3 / 25

Bitcoin RPC concentration is low (self-hosted majority, mempool.space, Blockstream Esplora). Of HSM vendors holding institutional Bitcoin keys (Thales Luna, AWS CloudHSM, YubiHSM, Ledger Vault), AWS KMS published a PQC hybrid TLS pilot for KMS endpoints in 2024-2025; broader signing-path PQC is research only. TEE attestation (Intel SGX/TDX, AMD SEV-SNP, AWS Nitro) remains classical for attestation-key signing.

7 Governance & Coordination weight 8% 54 / 100
7a · validator stake distribution 9 / 20

Mining pool concentration is real: Foundry USA ~25.6% + AntPool ~19.8% combined ~45%, top-3 with ViaBTC ~55-56%. Nakamoto coefficient for mining ≈ 3. Reachable node count ~20K; node software diversity is dominated by Bitcoin Core with minor Bitcoin Knots and btcd presence. March 2026 saw a 2-block reorg from Foundry, concentration is no longer hypothetical.

7b · upgrade cadence under pressure 14 / 20

SegWit 2017 (UASF), Taproot 2021 (Speedy Trial). Both successful. Cadence is slow but the network has shipped consensus-level upgrades under contested conditions. BIP-360 / BIP-361 are early. BIP-360 co-author estimate: 7-year migration window from spec to activation.

7c · named coordination lead 8 / 20

No formal foundation. Bitcoin Core maintainers operate under rough-consensus model. BIP authorship is distributed: BIP-360, BIP-361. No named coordination lead with mandate to ship PQ across the ecosystem. the parent company's CEO announced in April 2026 a coalition to coordinate Bitcoin PQ migration, early stage.

7d · adversarial coordination precedent 15 / 20

Block size wars 2015-2017, UASF, SegWit activation under fork-threat conditions. Strong precedent for rough-consensus coordination under economic and political pressure.

7e · canary tripwire mechanism 8 / 20

Hourglass V2 (Hunter Beast / cryptoquick) is a rate-limited spending rule canary, proposed at consensus level, ≤1 BTC/block from P2PK outputs (~144 BTC/day, vs unconstrained ~6,000+ P2PK transactions per block). Status: spec only on personal BIPs branch, not in bitcoin/bips. Project Eleven Q-Day Prize functions as a community honeypot signal, awarding 1 BTC for documented quantum attacks on ECC of progressively larger key sizes (15-bit broken April 2026, since disputed).

Source-disagreement disclosure

v3.1 requires every chain card to publish material divergences among authoritative sources, plus the delta-QRI under alternative weighting.

BIP-361 status

The BIP file was merged into the bitcoin/bips repository on 2026-04-15; the document itself remains labeled Status: Draft per BIP-process header. Both states are simultaneously true.

BIP-360 primitive selection

ML-DSA prioritized in current draft; FN-DSA preferred for aggregation; SLH-DSA candidate for stateless conservatism. Shortlist not finalized.

Project Eleven Q-Day Prize replication dispute

April 2026 1-BTC prize award contested, independent reviewers reproduced the 15-bit ECC break on classical hardware using random-number-generator approaches, raising questions about whether the demonstration is genuinely quantum.

Delta-QRI under alternative weighting

Under a stricter exposure-weighted model that weights Dim 2 cold-key exposure higher and Dim 6 vendor lower, QRI falls to ~25. Under a milestone-credit model that does not void 5d when 5a=0, QRI rises to ~32-33. Range: 25-33.

Announcement-to-shipped ratio

Announced: 11. Shipped: 0. Ratio: 11.

Tag: >1.5 deduction

Peers in the L1 profile

9 chains closest to Bitcoin by Stage then QRI.