Nine crypto organizations have teamed up to answer a question the industry has mostly been answering with marketing copy: what does “quantum-resistant” actually mean?
The group, called the Quantum Alliance, launched on October 15-16, 2026. Its stated mission is to define and test quantum-resistant standards for blockchain networks, and to make anyone claiming quantum resistance prove it against verifiable criteria.
Who is in the room and what they plan to do
The founding members include leaders from Quantus, American Fortress and Intmax, alongside other blockchain organizations that round out the group of nine.
The alliance says it will produce open definitions and standards for post-quantum readiness. The focus areas include transaction signatures and key management, the two places where a quantum attack would hurt most.
The work is split across four initial working groups:
Blockchain migration. How existing networks move from today’s cryptography to quantum-resistant alternatives without breaking everything along the way.
Post-quantum zero-knowledge proof systems. Zero-knowledge proofs let someone prove a statement is true without revealing the underlying data. The group will look at versions of these systems built to survive quantum attacks.
Wallet and key security. Where user funds actually live, and where most of the practical risk sits.
Cross-chain compatibility. Making sure one chain’s quantum fix does not leave it unable to talk to everyone else’s.
The alliance has committed to publishing all of its outputs publicly.
Why elliptic curves are the weak link
Most existing blockchain networks rely on elliptic-curve signatures to prove who owns what. The concern is Shor’s algorithm. Running on a sufficiently powerful future quantum computer, it could potentially work backward from a public key to the private key that controls the funds.
Blockchains are permanent records, and the public keys sitting on them are not going anywhere. An estimated 6.04 million to 6.4 million BTC, approximately 30.2% of the total supply, have public keys exposed at rest. Those coins sit at addresses where the public key is already visible on-chain, which is exactly the input a quantum attacker would need.
The standards gap the alliance wants to fill
The broader cryptography world has already done some of the groundwork. NIST finalized its post-quantum cryptography standards in August 2024, giving governments and enterprises a set of approved algorithms to start migrating toward.
Blockchains, though, have problems that NIST’s work does not neatly solve. Signatures get bigger with post-quantum schemes, which affects block space and fees. Migration requires coordination across thousands of independent users and node operators. And funds held by people who never move them cannot be upgraded on anyone’s schedule but their own.
That is the gap the Quantum Alliance is targeting: taking general-purpose post-quantum standards and translating them into criteria that fit how blockchains actually work. The migration framework is aimed squarely at protecting vulnerable public keys like the ones holding those exposed Bitcoin balances.
What this means for chains, builders and holders
For builders, open standards could lower the cost of doing this properly. A wallet developer or a bridge team would no longer have to design post-quantum security from scratch or guess what other chains will adopt. The cross-chain working group is especially relevant here, since a fragmented approach could leave assets safe on one network and exposed the moment they move to another.
For holders, coins sitting at addresses with exposed public keys carry a different long-term risk profile than coins that have never revealed their keys.
The founding roster also matters. The names publicly attached so far, Quantus, American Fortress and Intmax, are not the largest players in the industry. Whether the alliance becomes a reference point or remains a niche working group will likely depend on whether bigger networks, wallet providers and custodians decide to adopt or at least engage with its outputs.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.