Claims That Google Has Cracked Bitcoin’s Encryption System Are Circulating: So What’s the Truth?

Claims that Google has cracked Bitcoin’s encryption system have recently caused a stir on social media. However, experts say these claims are untrue and that the content of the scientific study has been distorted.

At the heart of the allegations are findings from Google’s quantum computing research suggesting that the resources needed to break Bitcoin’s secure cryptographic systems have been reduced by 20 times. Comments circulating on social media dramatized this development with statements such as, “Bitcoin can now be broken,” “Google did it but isn’t disclosing details,” and “Crypto has been given until 2029.”

However, cryptocurrency analyst Ahmet Usta, commenting on the issue, stated that these claims are significantly exaggerated. According to Usta, the relevant academic study does indeed indicate a reduction in the computational load required for quantum attacks; however, this does not mean that Bitcoin, in its current state, can be broken.

Usta added that the research in question mainly revealed theoretical advancements and that some approaches were validated with advanced cryptographic methods such as “Zero-Knowledge Proof,” but this did not directly mean that the Bitcoin network’s security had been compromised.

On the other hand, it is stated that the claims circulating on social media such as “Google is deliberately slowing down research” or “the crypto ecosystem has been given until 2029” are not included in the article. Usta said that the study only contains a technical approach regarding the possibility of not immediately disclosing some findings, and that interpreting this as an “ultimatum” is incorrect.

Experts say that while quantum computers have the potential to have significant long-term effects on cryptography, the Bitcoin network is generally secure at present. However, they point out that wallet addresses created in the early days, and whose public keys are visible on the blockchain, theoretically carry a higher risk.

*This is not investment advice.