Bitcoin experts split over plan to freeze Satoshi’s 1.1 million bitcoin as quantum threat grows

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao said Satoshi Nakamoto’s bitcoin should be frozen before quantum computers can steal it. Not everyone agrees.

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao has suggested freezing Satoshi Nakamoto’s estimated 1.1 million bitcoins if they remain unmoved once quantum computers threaten Bitcoin’s cryptography, a proposal that has divided leading industry figures.
Critics such as investor Michael Terpin argue that freezing Satoshi’s coins would violate Bitcoin’s core principle of being a permissionless system and doubt the decentralized community could reach consensus on such a change.
Other experts, including developer Jameson Lopp and Bitwise’s Matt Hougan, say the real issue is preparing Bitcoin for a post-quantum world, with ideas ranging from phased cryptographic upgrades to placing Satoshi’s coins in a legal trust, though all agree the debate is still largely theoretical.

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao’s suggestion that the estimated 1.1 million tokens belonging to Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto should be frozen to prevent them from being stolen should quantum computers break the blockchain’s cryptography elicited conflicting views among some of the industry’s best-known investors, developers and entrepreneurs.

Zhao, widely known by his initials CZ, floated the idea during a podcast last month with Galaxy Digital’s Alex Thorn. His idea was to give Satoshi six to 12 months to move the bitcoin BTC$63,332.65, worth about $68 billion at bitcoin’s current price of roughly $62,000. If nothing happened, he said, the community could decide whether to freeze those addresses.

“If we don’t do anything with it, then we’re basically giving it to somebody who’s going to hack it,” Zhao said.

Among the concerns is the possibility that someone with access to the tokens might dump them on the market, flooding supply and crashing the price. An alternative worry is the blockchain seizing control of an individual’s property in a system that’s designed to be permissionless and trustless.

Michael Terpin, founder and CEO of Transform Ventures and author of Bitcoin Supercycle, said freezing Satoshi’s coins would cross a line Bitcoin has never crossed. Terpin is sometimes called ‘the crypto godfather’ for his involvement in the industry around 2013, when it was still young and somewhat misunderstood by the mainstream.

“While I appreciate the proactivity in CZ’s proposal, it begins a slippery slope of creating permission in a permissionless system relative to personal property,” Terpin told CoinDesk.

“If indeed [Satoshi] is dead, as many Bitcoiners believe, then only a quantum hack unlocks the coins. While it would hurt the price substantially if the coins were dumped, it would be a one-time episode and post-quantum bitcoin would recover.”

Terpin also questioned whether Bitcoin’s decentralized community could ever agree on such a change. “Considering it took years just to implement SegWit, I doubt a quick consensus could be formed here,” he said.

Jameson Lopp, co-founder and chief security officer at Casa, said CZ’s comments miss the larger issue. “I don’t really consider it a proposal so much as him musing upon the threat,” Lopp said in an email interview.

Freeze or not to freeze

Lopp, also a prominent cypherpunk and leading Bitcoin developer and advocate, said the debate is not about Satoshi’s coins. It is about preparing Bitcoin for a future in which today’s cryptography is no longer secure. “I think this is not a binary debate of ‘to freeze or not to freeze.’”

He authored Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 361 (BIP-361), which outlines a phased migration to quantum-resistant cryptography.

“The goal is to create incentives and deadlines so users, exchanges, custodians, wallets and institutions actually migrate in a timely fashion,” saidLopp, who in April said it would be better to freeze Satoshi’s hoard and millions of other dormant bitcoins than to let hackers steal them.

Matt Hougan, chief investment officer at Bitwise, rejected both letting the coins be stolen and freezing them outright.

Instead, he pointed to a proposal by Castle Island Ventures partner Nic Carter that would place Satoshi’s bitcoin into a legal trust until ownership could be proven through historical electronic records.

Avoiding philosophical challenges

“I actually like Nic Carter’s proposal,” Hougan said via email. “It avoids the philosophical challenges of both CZ’s suggestion and the ‘let whatever happens’ perspective.”

Hougan said the market already treats Satoshi’s holdings as effectively unavailable, meaning almost any change would create more risk than opportunity.

“I don’t think there is any way that developments around Satoshi’s coins are positive for the ecosystem,” he said. “The market already accounts for them as frozen forever.”

For now, the debate remains largely theoretical. Researchers are still working on practical post-quantum cryptography for Bitcoin, and no consensus has been reached on how the network should respond if its encryption does become vulnerable.