Is Quantum Bitcoin hacked here?
Bitcoin was built on the principle that once funds are secured by a private key, only the owner can access them. But what if that assumption is no longer held?
In X’s now-deleted post, former Wall Street trader Josh Mandel reportedly claimed that Quantum Computers was being used to suck up Bitcoin (BTC) from long-dormant wallets.
According to him, “large players” find ways to extract BTC directly from these wallets without going through open markets, leaving blockchain analysts as their only detection tool.
In the case of truth, its meaning is profound. Such activities will undermine the very foundations of Bitcoin’s security and ownership model. But what does on-chain evidence really show? And can we even demonstrate that the technology needed to achieve this exists today?
This article will cover Mandel’s claims, expert responses, and the current state of quantum computing.
Did you know? It is estimated that more than 2.3 million to 3.3 million BTC will be lost forever due to a forgotten private key or an inactive wallet.
What Josh Mandel claimed
Mandel claims that older, inactive Bitcoin wallets are being quietly ejected using quantum computing. He argues that the main actors accumulate BTC not through exchanges but through accessing private keys in wallets that the owner is unlikely to recognize or respond to.
Key points of his claim:
- Target Wallet: A long dormant account that is often assumed to be abandoned or bound by the owner of the deceased.
- Out-of-market accumulation: Coins are extracted without price interruptions or creating large sell orders.
- Detection risk: While only blockchain forensics can reveal patterns of suspicious movement, Mandel admits that there is no clear evidence.
- Quantum Leap: He implies that quantum technology has reached a point where it can decipher Bitcoin’s crypto defenses in ways that classical computing cannot.
Importantly, Mandel does not provide any difficult evidence. His position is that the scenario is technically possible and may have already been deployed, but this remains unexamined.
Did you know? Oxford scientists achieved an error rate of just 0.000015% (one error in 6.7 million operations) for a given quantum operation. This is the fidelity of the new world record.
Technical feasibility: Can Quantum Tech do this now?
Mandel’s argument depends on the fact that quantum computers are well ahead of the public key encryption that protects Bitcoin wallets. To evaluate this, we need to look into what such attacks are related to and how close is current technology to make it possible.
Bitcoin relies on the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA), in particular the SECP256K1 curve.
Once the coin is used, the wallet’s public key becomes visible on-chain. If an attacker can derive a private key from that public key, the remaining funds can be seized.
Shor’s algorithm, quantum algorithm, can theoretically do this exponentially faster than classical methods, but can only be done on quantum hardware that goes far beyond what we do today.
However, in reality, there are still some technical hurdles.
- Logical qubits and error correction: Physical qubits are unstable. To construct fault-tolerant logic kitbits, error correction multiplies the hardware requirements.
- Scale of Qubits you need: Estimates suggest that hundreds of thousands (probably millions) of physical qubits are required to break a single SECP256K1 key when error correction overhead is included.
- Gate Fidelity and Error Rate: The operation must be near perfect. Current chips like Google’s 105 Qubit Willow only reach thresholds where error correction is useful, but remain far from full fault tolerance.
- Expert Prediction: Most researchers have lengthened quantum computers that break realistic ECDSAs at least 10 years apart, without breakthroughs in coherence times, scaling and error suppression.
Mandel means that this stage has already reached it. Someone has made the hardware strong and reserved, and it’s modest enough to crack a private key from a dormant wallet without detection.
However, based on public knowledge, today’s devices are not close to the scale and stability they require.
Did you know? One of the Bitcoin wallets tied to Mt. Gox Hack is still dormant, holding 79,957 BTC, accounting for around 0.4% of the total Bitcoin supply.
Pushback from the Bitcoin and Crypto Community
The response from the Bitcoin community was quick and skeptical.
“There’s literally no chance this is happening right now,” said Harry Beckwith, founder of Hot Pixel Group. Matthew Pines of the Bitcoin Policy Institute called the theory “false” and criticised the lack of evidence.
Their argument follows several lines:
- No quantum power yet: The progress is stable, but the current machine doesn’t have the Kikubit count, error correction and processing power needed for a Bitcoin encryption attack. Quantum risk is authentic, but remains a concern for the future.
- There is no supporting evidence: Although on-chain movement of dormant coins has been observed, there is no clear indication of quantum-driven theft. Most are better explained by owners who reactivate wallets, inheritance transfers, or security upgrades.
- Exposed public key restrictions: Attacks are only possible if public keys are revealed, and even so, enemies must calculate their private keys in real time. Many long, obstructive wallets did not reveal public keys at all.
- Blockchain Transparency: Dormant wallets are closely tracked by analytics companies. Large stealth drains almost certainly cause red flags, but this is not seen.
The general view is that while quantum computing ultimately poses a threat, Mandel’s proposal that it is already weaponized against Bitcoin is premature.
Shows (or not visible) in on-chain data
If quantum-based theft is occurring, the blockchain should show clear signs. So far, it’s not.
- Back wallet re-activated: Several old wallets of Satoshi Era (2009-2011) have moved a lot. For example, 80,000 BTC has moved across eight addresses that have been inactive for 14 years. However, analysts believe these are not drains of unknown cause, but rather voluntary moves to modern address formats like segwit.
- There are no unusual signatures: There is no published evidence of transaction patterns suggesting quantum key breaks, such as simultaneous extraction to match public key exposures. The observed activities coincide with everyday actions such as integration and fee optimization.
- No confirmed theft: Reaction aside, cases of losses linked directly to quantum computing have not been tested. Older addresses tend to move coins quietly without evidence of forced transfer.
- Legacy vulnerabilities remain: A meaningful amount of BTC is still in old format, such as payments to public keys (P2PK) and P2PK hash (P2PKH). This highlights the potential risks of advances in quantum power, but there is no evidence of exploitation yet.
In short, Onchain data confirms that there is a vulnerability, but does not provide evidence that it is being exploited in quantum law.
Mandel’s point of view
Mandel’s warning that quantum computers are already stealing bitcoin from their dormant wallets remains unproven.
ECDSA encryption that protects Bitcoin is still considered secure, and most experts estimate it at least 10 years ago before quantum hardware breaks realistically.
Some predictions suggest that risks could emerge in the late 2020s, especially for wallets with exposed public keys. For now, blockchain evidence points to explanations of benignity such as reactivation, movement, and integration.
The signs to watch are clear. A sudden, large transfer from legacy format, a quick move right after public key exposure, or a verifiable demonstration of private key extraction. Until they appear, quantum threats should be seen as future challenges to prepare, not as present reality.