{"id":2275,"date":"2026-04-10T18:54:26","date_gmt":"2026-04-10T18:54:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/?p=2275"},"modified":"2026-04-10T18:54:26","modified_gmt":"2026-04-10T18:54:26","slug":"analyst-says-xrp-has-stronger-protection-than-bitcoin-against-potential-quantum-threats","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/2026\/04\/10\/analyst-says-xrp-has-stronger-protection-than-bitcoin-against-potential-quantum-threats\/","title":{"rendered":"Analyst Says XRP Has Stronger Protection Than Bitcoin Against Potential Quantum Threats"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A recent analysis suggests that XRP may be less vulnerable to future quantum computing attacks compared to Bitcoin, largely due to how its network handles wallet security.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Data shows that among inactive XRP whale wallets, only two have remained untouched for more than five years while also having their public keys exposed. This indicates that the number of high value wallets at risk is extremely small.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The findings come from on chain research shared on April 8, which highlights a clear difference between XRP and Bitcoin. In Bitcoin\u2019s case, a larger number of dormant wallets and older address formats create more opportunities for exposure if quantum technology becomes advanced enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to researcher Vet, about 300,000 XRP accounts holding a total of 2.4 billion tokens have never sent any transactions. Because of this, their public keys have not been revealed, making them resistant to attacks that depend on accessing such data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In contrast, only two major XRP wallets holding around 21 million tokens each meet the criteria of being both inactive for over five years and having exposed public keys. Vet noted that vulnerable dormant XRP whale wallets are almost nonexistent, adding that active accounts can still take precautionary steps such as updating their keys when necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This situation differs significantly from Bitcoin, where large inactive holdings remain, including the wallet believed to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto, which contains more than one million BTC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The difference stems from the design of the XRP Ledger, where public keys are not revealed until a transaction is signed. This contrasts with older Bitcoin address types that expose public keys earlier, making them more susceptible to certain types of attacks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even for active XRP accounts, risks can be reduced. The network allows users to rotate their signing keys without changing their accounts, offering an added layer of protection. While not a complete solution, more advanced quantum resistant cryptographic methods could be introduced in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Additional safeguards were also highlighted by Ripple engineer Mayukha Vadari, who explained that escrow features on the network prevent funds from being accessed before a specified time. This holds true regardless of computing power, meaning attackers cannot simply unlock funds early. Although there are rare scenarios where an account could be disrupted, there is little financial incentive since the attacker would not gain access to the funds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concerns about quantum computing and crypto security have been growing, especially after a Google research paper published on March 31 suggested that highly advanced machines could potentially break private keys of major Bitcoin and Ethereum wallets within minutes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Adding to the discussion, crypto analyst Udi Wertheimer pointed out that the Lightning Network may face structural risks because its design requires public keys to be shared between participants, leaving them exposed even when offline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In response to these challenges, efforts are already underway to improve security. Researchers from Blockstream have introduced post quantum signature schemes on a sidechain, allowing users to adopt stronger protections without making changes to Bitcoin\u2019s core protocol.#crypto#cryptonews https:\/\/coinsignals.net<\/a> https:\/\/t.me\/coinsignalpublic<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A recent analysis suggests that XRP may be less vulnerable to future quantum computing attacks compared to Bitcoin, largely due to how its network handles wallet...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2275","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2275","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2275"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2275\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2277,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2275\/revisions\/2277"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2275"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2275"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.coinsignals.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2275"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}