Monad developers published a proposal on August 24, 2026, to decouple wallet addresses from their authentication identifiers — allowing users to swap lost or compromised keys without changing their address or moving funds.
🔑 In brief
- Monad published « Flexible and Upgradeable Account Authentication » on August 24, 2026, authored by Kushal Babel and Jan Camenisch.
- The scheme enables migration to post-quantum signatures, passkeys or multi-sig without changing the address.
- Around $470 billion in Bitcoin may be exposed to a quantum attack, per Bloomberg as cited by AmericanFortress.
- Ethereum targets 2027 (Hegotá) with EIP-8141; Google Quantum AI estimates ~1,200 logical qubits could break ECDSA-256.
- No quantum computer is currently capable of breaking Bitcoin or Ethereum cryptography.
Monad’s proposal: separating the address from the key
Kushal Babel and Jan Camenisch, researchers associated with Monad’s development, detailed an architecture in which the public address stays fixed while the authentication mechanisms controlling it can evolve. The current document covers only the high-level design — a detailed implementation specification is expected in the coming weeks.
In practice, this separation enables three scenarios. First, account recovery after key loss, via social recovery or passkeys. Second, conversion of an ordinary account into a multi-signature wallet without redeployment. Third, migration to a post-quantum cryptographic scheme — typically SPHINCS+ or CRYSTALS-Dilithium — without address changes or fund transfers.
« We want to give users the ability to evolve their authentication over time, without breaking account continuity or forcing a risky migration. »
Kushal Babel, co-author of the proposal
For context, Monad raised $19 million in 2023, then $225 million in a Paradigm-led round in 2024. The network now shows about $939 million in total value locked across its DeFi apps — including $732 million in stablecoins — and roughly $329 million in 24-hour exchange volume. The MON token rose about 2% on announcement day, a measured but positive market response.
The crypto industry is mobilizing
Monad’s proposal did not arrive in a vacuum. Earlier in 2026, several players unveiled complementary solutions. AmericanFortress published on Cryptography ePrint Archive a cryptographic scheme that protects existing wallets against future quantum attacks without moving funds, rotating keys or changing addresses. The system is designed to be compatible with hierarchical deterministic (HD) wallets using a seed phrase — the architecture used by Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana and other networks relying on elliptic-curve cryptography (ECC).
Citing Bloomberg, AmericanFortress estimates that around $470 billion in Bitcoin could be vulnerable to a quantum attack. A consortium led by Strategy has committed $15 million to fund Bitcoin quantum-security research.
Separately, Freedom Factory launched PQ1, a post-quantum hardware wallet for Ethereum and EVM networks. PQ1 combines SPHINCS+ signatures with ERC-4337 smart accounts, contrasting with AmericanFortress’s purely software-based approach. Sui Research, meanwhile, developed an EdDSA-based method using zero-knowledge proofs to switch to quantum safety without a hard fork or address change, applicable to Solana, Sui and Near — but not directly to Bitcoin or Ethereum, which use different signature schemes.
Ethereum and Bitcoin: two different strategies
On the Ethereum side, the Foundation formed a dedicated post-quantum security team in January 2026, with work publicly tracked on pq.ethereum.org. The cornerstone of the strategy is EIP-8141, which introduces native account abstraction and lets users choose their own signature scheme. This feature is planned for the Hegotá upgrade, slated for 2027.
Four areas have been identified as requiring post-quantum upgrades:
- Validator consensus signatures (BLS scheme)
- Data availability commitments (KZG)
- Account signatures (ECDSA)
- Zero-knowledge proof systems
Post-quantum infrastructure milestones target 2029. Researchers are also exploring hash-based validator signatures leanXMSS paired with a minimal zkVM (leanVM) to aggregate quantum-secure signatures efficiently. Weekly post-quantum interop devnets now bring together more than ten client teams.
For Bitcoin, the situation is more complex. Newer addresses use P2PKH or P2TR formats, which only reveal the public key when a transaction is broadcast — a partial safeguard. But older P2PK outputs expose the public key directly. Custodian Fireblocks notes that if a sufficiently powerful quantum computer existed today, it could derive the secret keys for those legacy addresses.
Comparative table of post-quantum approaches
| Project / Actor | Approach | Target | No hard fork needed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monad | Decouple address from authentication | EVM accounts | Yes |
| AmericanFortress | Crypto scheme compatible with HD wallets | BTC, ETH, SOL, other ECC chains | Yes (software) |
| Freedom Factory (PQ1) | SPHINCS+ hardware wallet + ERC-4337 | ETH and EVM | Yes (hardware) |
| Sui Research | EdDSA + zero-knowledge proofs | SOL, SUI, NEAR | Yes |
| Ethereum Foundation | EIP-8141, native account abstraction | ETH (Hegotá, 2027) | Planned, not immediate |
A tight timeline
No quantum computer can currently break Ethereum or Bitcoin cryptography. Standards bodies NIST and ENISA have already selected post-quantum algorithms deemed robust: CRYSTALS-Dilithium, Falcon, SPHINCS+ and MAYO. In March 2026, Google Quantum AI published an estimate suggesting that breaking 256-bit elliptic-curve cryptography could require around 1,200 logical qubits — about 20 times less than earlier estimates, bringing the threat horizon closer than anticipated.
Within the Bitcoin community, debate continues between proponents of an optional upgrade — championed notably by Adam Back — and advocates of a forced migration of vulnerable legacy outputs. The risk is as much political as technical: a quantum hard fork would require global coordination on a question where, in many cases, the absence of a private key makes certain holders unreachable.
Conclusion: toward a modular authentication layer
The Monad, AmericanFortress, PQ1 and Sui Research proposals converge on a shared idea: make the wallet authentication layer evolvable rather than frozen at address generation. This modularity addresses a dual imperative — recovering lost accounts and preparing the post-quantum transition — without imposing a traumatic migration on asset holders.
Whether the different ecosystems will converge on a common standard or settle for a multi-protocol approach remains open. The scenario of a quantum hard fork on Bitcoin — technically feasible but politically explosive — is the sword of Damocles pushing the entire industry to prepare rather than react.
Sources
- CoinDesk — Monad proposes wallet upgrade that could survive lost keys and quantum attacks
- Dig Watch — Quantum-resistant crypto wallets now possible without address changes
- TradingView / Cointelegraph — AmericanFortress proposes quantum-safe wallet protection
- Ethereum Foundation — Post-quantum security roadmap
- Fireblocks — How blockchains will evolve for the quantum era
- Yahoo Finance — Adam Back pushes optional upgrades for Bitcoin
This article is published for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice. Do your own research (DYOR) before making any decision.
