On May 2, 2026, Paradigm general partner Dan Robinson officially released the PACTS (Provable Address-Control Timestamps) proposal, attempting to provide a protective mechanism for old wallets and dormant addresses without the need for immediate asset migration in the context of the Bitcoin network facing quantum computing threats. The proposal recommends utilizing the BIP-322 standard and OpenTimestamps anchoring technology to leave a commitment of "proof of ownership" on-chain, ensuring that even if the network freezes vulnerable addresses in response to quantum risks in the future, legitimate holders can still unlock assets through STARK zero-knowledge proofs. This move not only fills the technical gap in the previous BIP-361 proposal regarding relief paths for old addresses but also pushes the safety issue of vast dormant assets, including approximately 1.1 million BTC belonging to Satoshi Nakamoto, back into the center of market discussion.

At the same time, the security incidents that broke out intensively in the multi-chain ecosystem from the end of April to early May further revealed the current vulnerabilities in protocol layers and contract logic. According to AiCoin data, the Solana ecosystem's DeFi protocol Carrot announced it would cease operations and enforce deleveraging to release liquidity on May 14 due to the ongoing impact of the Drift vulnerability incident; the perpetual contract protocol Aftermath Finance on the Sui network experienced a vulnerability attack on April 30 and is currently being assisted by the Sui Foundation to push forward compensation plans; meanwhile, the SWEAT token contract was attacked, leading to approximately 13.71 billion tokens (about 65% of the total supply, worth $3.5 million) being briefly controlled by the attacker. In the face of frequent security storms, the Ethereum Foundation significantly increased its funding for zero-knowledge proofs, cryptographic research, and core protocol security in its first quarter funding list for 2026. From Bitcoin's pre-research on quantum resistance to patching multi-chain security, investment in security and architectural upgrades is becoming the absolute main thread of current on-chain logic.

PACTs Allow Old Wallets to Self-Rescue Before the Quantum Storm

At the forefront of Bitcoin security defenses, Paradigm general partner Dan Robinson released the PACTs (Provable Address-Control Timestamps) proposal in early May 2026, providing a key technical path to address the quantum vulnerabilities of old addresses. The core logic of PACTs lies in "anchoring first, unlocking later": holders do not need to move BTC immediately; rather, they can create proof of ownership offline and timestamp it to reserve a form of "digital insurance" for their assets. In terms of the specific process, holders need to generate a random salt value and process signature information from their Bitcoin addresses according to the BIP-322 standard to generate a current proof of control over the address. Subsequently, this salt value and proof are packaged into an on-chain commitment, anchored to the Bitcoin blockchain through OpenTimestamps service. This process ensures that the related proof documents and salt value can remain private at this stage, without exposing privacy or incurring the risks of asset movement.

The practical value of the PACTs scheme lies in its forward-looking self-rescue mechanism. According to the scheme, if in the future the Bitcoin network implements freezing rules for quantum-vulnerable addresses within the scope of PACTs to address quantum threats, holders can unlock and retrieve their assets using the previously anchored commitments and through quantum-resistant STARK zero-knowledge proofs. This design cleverly leverages the characteristics of zero-knowledge proofs, leaving the complicated verification logic off-chain while efficiently verifying only on-chain. However, the implementation of PACTs is not without thresholds; it heavily relies on the Bitcoin network introducing the verification capability for STARK proofs through a soft fork in the future. More importantly, this scheme does not automatically become a global protection; only wallets that proactively create and anchor commitments by the actual controllers of the address keys before the quantum threat approaches can attain true immunity during the future quantum storm.

Satoshi Nakamoto's Life-and-Death Choice for Dormant Addresses

The core conflict of this series of quantum-resistant proposals ultimately points to the most sacred and inviolable part of the Bitcoin network: the long-dormant early addresses. According to the BIP-361 proposal put forward by well-known developer Jameson Lopp and others in mid-April 2026, the Bitcoin community is facing an extremely radical route choice: this proposal plans to gradually eliminate all quantum-vulnerable addresses over approximately five years. This means that if holders fail to proactively migrate their assets to quantum-resistant addresses within the specified window period, these assets may face the risk of being forcibly frozen by network rules in the future. According to AiCoin data, this rule will directly affect a significant number of early dormant assets, including around 1.1 million BTC belonging to Satoshi Nakamoto (currently valued at approximately $84 billion). For these addresses, BIP-361 is not just a technical upgrade but a “final ultimatum” regarding the continuity of ownership.

Although Dan Robinson’s proposed PACTs scheme attempts to provide relief in a more gentle manner, the generational gap in technical standards creates significant coverage blind spots for this relief. The original intention of the PACTs design is to provide a path for wallets derived from the BIP-32 standard (a deterministic key generation standard introduced in 2012), allowing holders to prove control without moving assets. However, the vast majority of early wallets generated before 2012 in Bitcoin history—including most of Satoshi Nakamoto's known addresses—do not support BIP-32. This means that even if PACTs can fill the gap left by BIP-361 in relief for derived wallets, the oldest and most symbolic Bitcoin assets still cannot achieve complete immunity through the PACTs path.

This technological “hard decoupling” poses an unprecedented challenge to the social consensus of Bitcoin. The effectiveness of PACTs is predicated on the address controllers having to “actively” create commitments and anchor data; if the holders of these dormant assets (or Satoshi Nakamoto himself) do not take action, they will still be treated as high-risk objects under quantum threats according to the rules of BIP-361. This not only ignites a long-standing narrative game regarding “Is Satoshi Nakamoto still around?” but also tears a rift regarding consensus within the community: whether to adhere to the immutability of “private key equals justice” and let hundreds of billions of assets be exposed to risks or even frozen in the quantum era, or to forcibly delineate the life-and-death line for dormant assets for the overall safety of the network through a soft fork? This decision will directly define Bitcoin's character as "digital gold" under extreme technological shifts.

Solana and Sui's Multiple Incidents Sound the Alarm

While Bitcoin's quantum-resistant proposals trigger long-term games, emerging public chain ecosystems face even more urgent security tests. According to AiCoin data, the Solana ecosystem's DeFi protocol Carrot recently announced that due to the persistent catastrophic impact of the previous Drift vulnerability exploit, the protocol can no longer maintain normal operations and has been forced to enter a shutdown countdown. Carrot has set May 14, 2026, as the deadline for the remaining fund withdrawals, involving three core pools: Boost, Turbo, and CRT. After the deadline, the system will forcibly initiate deleveraging procedures, clearing all leveraged positions to maximize liquidity for CRT redemption. Although Carrot promises to proportionally distribute any recoverable funds related to Drift, there is currently no clear timeline, marking a complete hard landing for the protocol in responding to external liquidity shocks and exposing the survival dilemma of ecological applications under the fundamental protocol risk transmission.

Meanwhile, Sui Network and token protocols also encountered high-intensity attack challenges, but their response paths exhibit stronger governance intervention characteristics. On April 30, the perpetual contract protocol Aftermath Finance deployed on Sui disclosed it had encountered a vulnerability attack and immediately suspended operations. Subsequently, the Sui Foundation and Mysten Labs quickly intervened to assist in fund recovery and ensure the protocol's continued operation. According to protocol disclosures, it is expected to complete full compensation for users within 48 to 72 hours; this rapid response mechanism backed by the foundation somewhat hedges on-chain risks. The SWEAT token attack occurring on the same day showcased another extreme scenario: attackers emptied multiple foundation accounts within approximately 30 seconds, gaining control of approximately 13.71 billion SWEAT, accounting for roughly 65% of the total supply, with a market value of about $3.5 million at the time. The SWEAT team froze the contracts urgently, rapidly coordinated with MEXC to freeze the attacker's accounts, and worked with Rhea Finance to pause trading, ultimately successfully restoring user balances and planning to submit detailed evidence analysis reports to law enforcement.

Comparing these three security incidents reveals that the survival probability of on-chain protocols in the face of sudden crises greatly depends on their operational choices and governance depth. Carrot’s forced offline situation exposes the governance vulnerability of DeFi protocols amidst layered risk due to vulnerabilities; whereas Aftermath and SWEAT's fund recovery relies more on rapid intervention from centralized institutions and cross-platform collaboration. This significant difference in security governance prompts the market to recognize that in the current multi-chain security storm, the underlying code security of protocols is indeed core, but the support strength of the underlying foundations, the operational efficiency of trading platforms, and the response plans for extreme sell pressures have become critical dimensions for assessing the safety boundaries of on-chain assets.

Ethereum Foundation Increases Investment in ZK and Security Infrastructure

In the context of the multi-chain security storm and quantum resistance discussions, the Ethereum Foundation announced its first quarter funding project list on April 29, 2026, explicitly focusing on protocol security and underlying infrastructure as annual defense priorities. According to data, this round of funding is highly concentrated on optimizing protocol clients and network operational security. At the protocol and client levels, the foundation has notably supported performance tuning for Geth and Erigon, as well as upgrading for the Lighthouse client, while also advancing the construction of network monitoring tools after the Pectra upgrade. By injecting funds into HSM key management, validator security tools like Vero, and the DISC-NG node discovery mechanism, Ethereum aims to enhance reliability at the node level, providing higher participation security boundaries for institutional participants.

Meanwhile, the foundation continues to delve into cryptography and zero-knowledge proofs (ZK) to address long-term technical challenges. Funded projects cover Poseidon hash function analysis, Gröbner basis attack research, as well as advanced explorations into quantum resistance and homomorphic mixed encryption. Regarding the security of the execution layer, the foundation also supported the formal verification of RISC-V zkVM, attempting to strengthen the logical completeness of ZK infrastructure through mathematical means. This increased attention on underlying algorithms and verification mechanisms aims not only to enhance Ethereum's long-term scalability but also to construct a firewall against potential cryptographic crises at the algorithm level.

In terms of applications and the developer ecosystem, the foundation is providing transparency analyses for Layer2 ecosystems through funding for L2BEAT, continuously improving data infrastructure. The developer toolchain has also been significantly enhanced, including upgrading the BuidlGuidl education system, developing the WalletConnect clear signature library, and building ERC standard communities. Additionally, privacy technologies (such as Tor integration and Privacy Pool SDK) and decentralized identity (like did:ethr standard upgrades) have also received funding support. This series of funding actions indicates that Ethereum is attempting to indirectly reinforce the underlying logic of decentralized governance and asset custody by enhancing ecosystem transparency and toolchain security, thereby maintaining its leading position in security infrastructure amid multi-chain competition.

Extended Security Front: What to Watch Next

From the long-term games of Bitcoin's quantum resistance proposals to the near-term responses to multi-chain security incidents, and the ongoing investment by the Ethereum Foundation in underlying infrastructure, security has become a common main thread spanning cross-chain and cross-layer. Although PACTs and BIP-361 provide technical paths to protect old address assets, AiCoin data shows that both proposals are currently in the early proposition stage. The implementation of PACTs relies on the Bitcoin network introducing native STARK verification capabilities through a soft fork, while the five-year elimination cycle outlined in BIP-361 has yet to see substantive freezing rules implementation. This means that the quantum security narrative currently remains in the consensus-building phase; whether it can ultimately translate into a forced standard at the network protocol level still depends on the community's weighing of soft fork risks and the urgency of asset protection.

In responding to real security shocks, the governance differences exhibited by different protocols have become key indicators for investors to assess project risks. Carrot in the Solana ecosystem chose an orderly exit after the Drift vulnerability incident, setting a May 14 withdrawal deadline and implementing system deleveraging to prioritize liquidity for token redemptions; whereas Aftermath Finance and SWEAT showcased another path, with the former advancing full compensation with the Sui Foundation's assistance to maintain operations, and the latter restoring user balances by linking with trading platforms to freeze accounts. Moving forward, the market needs to focus on three major variables: first, the pace and technical games of the quantum-resistant proposals within the Bitcoin ecosystem; second, whether the security emergency response model in a multi-chain environment can evolve from "case coordination" to "toolkit collaboration"; third, the actual landing effects of the cryptographic and protocol security projects funded by the Ethereum Foundation in the first quarter over the next several quarters, which will directly determine the resilience ceiling of mainstream public chains in facing the next wave of technical challenges.

Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
AiCoin On-chain: https://aicoin.com/hyperliquid
AiCoin exclusive Hyperliquid benefits: https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/join/AICOIN88
AiCoin exclusive Aster benefits: https://www.asterdex.com/zh-CN/referral/9C50e2

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。