How Quantum Computing could Break Bitcoin’s Encryption in 2026

The moment of truth for Bitcoin’s foundational security may be closer than you think. The intersection of quantum computing and blockchain technology is no longer science fiction; it’s a rapidly approaching reality that could redefine the concept of digital trust. If you’re holding Bitcoin or investing in the crypto space, understanding this quantum threat is no longer optional—it’s critical risk management.

This article cuts through the hype to deliver a data-driven, actionable analysis of whether a quantum computer could truly break Bitcoin and what it means for your digital assets. We’ll demystify the complex science, examine the realistic timelines from leading researchers, and provide a clear roadmap for protecting your investments. The crypto industry stands at a crossroads, and the decision to adopt post-quantum cryptography could determine its survival.

Introduction: The Looming “Q-Day” Panic

If you follow tech or crypto news, you’ve likely been bombarded with apocalyptic headlines: “Quantum Computers to Kill Bitcoin by 2026!” The narrative has shifted from a theoretical physics problem to a seemingly imminent engineering challenge, fueled by massive investments and breakthroughs in AI-accelerated quantum research. The fear is visceral—what happens to your digital gold if the lock can be picked by a machine that defies classical logic?

This isn’t just speculative fiction. Major institutions are sounding the alarm. The Federal Reserve has warned of “harvest now, decrypt later” (HNDL) attacks, where adversaries collect encrypted blockchain data today to decrypt it once quantum computers are powerful enough. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has publicly stated that “elliptic curves are going to die,” with some experts predicting fault-tolerant quantum computers could break current cryptography before 2028.

Yet, major investment firms like Grayscale call this a “red herring” for 2026, suggesting market prices won’t be affected in the near term. So, who’s right? Is your Bitcoin safe, or are we on the cusp of a cryptographic collapse?

This guide cuts through the noise. We’ll demystify the quantum threat, assess the realistic 2026 timeline, identify exactly which coins are vulnerable, and—most importantly—provide a clear, actionable roadmap for investors, developers, and the Bitcoin community to ensure resilience.

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF): A full-scale break of Bitcoin’s encryption in 2026 is highly unlikely due to immense technical hurdles. However, the foundational risk is real and accelerating. The immediate danger is not a sudden network collapse but the HNDL attack vector and the community’s preparedness—or lack thereof—to migrate to quantum-resistant protocols.

What Is Quantum Computing?

Quantum computing is a computing model that uses qubits and quantum effects (like superposition and entanglement) to solve specific classes of problems more efficiently than classical computers. In the Bitcoin context, the only reason quantum matters is that it unlocks algorithms (notably Shor’s and Grover’s) that change the economics of breaking certain cryptographic assumptions.​

From a “why should anyone care?” angle: quantum isn’t a better laptop—it’s a new capability tier that can turn “impossible” security tasks into “possible (eventually)”, which directly impacts trust, retention, and conversion in crypto products.​

What Happens to Bitcoin When Quantum Computing Arrives?

When “cryptographically relevant” quantum computing arrives, Bitcoin faces two very different threat categories: (1) signature/key theft risk (ownership), and (2) hashing security-margin reduction (mining + general integrity). The more urgent scenario discussed across credible sources is the signature side—quantum could make it feasible to derive private keys from exposed public keys in vulnerable spending situations, enabling theft from certain addresses.​

By contrast, SHA-256 is usually framed as “weakened but not instantly broken,” because Grover’s algorithm provides a quadratic speedup that reduces the effective security level rather than making collisions/preimages trivial overnight. That’s why the best risk posture in 2026 is not panic—it’s migration planning, user education, and operational controls that reduce exposure.​

Can Bitcoin Be Quantum-Resistant?

Yes—Bitcoin can become more quantum-resistant, but it requires protocol-level and ecosystem-level change (new address types, new signature schemes, wallet upgrades, and likely a long migration window). In practice, the conversation is already happening: BIP-360 proposes a “Pay to Quantum Resistant Hash” (P2QRH) output type as a relatively unobtrusive first step, with an intent to introduce post-quantum signature schemes in later proposals.​

In parallel, community proposals like QRAMP argue for a mandatory migration period that phases out legacy ECDSA-based spends after a deadline, forcing the ecosystem to move before the threat becomes immediate. The business takeaway: quantum-resistance is feasible, but it’s a multi-year coordination project—exactly why teams that start early protect brand trust (and reduce future customer-support chaos).​

Decoding the Quantum Threat: Why Your Bitcoin Could Be at Risk

To grasp the danger, you must first understand the revolution quantum computing represents. Classical computers, the devices we use daily, operate on binary bits—simple switches that are either a 0 or a 1. Every calculation is a sequential, linear process.

Quantum computers are fundamentally different. They use quantum bits, or qubits, which exploit the mind-bending principles of quantum mechanics. Thanks to superposition, a qubit can be a 0, a 1, or both simultaneously. Through entanglement, qubits can be linked so that the state of one instantly influences another, regardless of distance.

Ian Smith, CEO of Quantum EVM, offers a powerful analogy: “A classical computer is like a diligent librarian scanning every page of a book to find a word. A quantum computer is like a ghost that can walk through every aisle at the same time, pointing to the correct book in seconds”. This isn’t just about speed; it’s about solving classes of problems—like the mathematical puzzles underlying modern encryption—that are virtually impossible for classical machines.

The Cryptographic Foundations of Bitcoin (And Their Weak Points)

Bitcoin’s security relies on two main cryptographic pillars:

1. SHA-256: A hash function used for mining and maintaining the blockchain’s integrity.

2. Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA): The system that generates the public and private keys securing your wallet.

Here’s the critical vulnerability: ECDSA is the weak link. Your Bitcoin wallet’s safety depends on a one-way mathematical relationship. It’s easy to generate a public address from your private key, but computationally infeasible for any classical computer to reverse the process and derive the private key from the public one.

The quantum threat shatters this assumption. Shor’s algorithm, a quantum algorithm devised in 1994, is perfectly designed to solve the “elliptic curve discrete logarithm problem” that ECDSA relies on. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer running Shor’s algorithm could theoretically derive private keys from public keys, allowing an attacker to forge signatures and steal funds.

*But what about SHA-256?* A different quantum algorithm, Grover’s algorithm, could theoretically accelerate attacks on hash functions. However, its impact is far less severe. It would only provide a quadratic speedup, effectively reducing SHA-256’s 256-bit security to 128-bit security—a concern, but not a catastrophic break. The consensus is clear: the primary and existential risk to Bitcoin from quantum computing is against its signature scheme, ECDSA.

The 2026 Countdown: Is the Bitcoin Doomsday Realistic?

Headlines proclaiming quantum computing could break Bitcoin’s encryption in 2026 have fueled a market narrative of imminent doom. Major tech firms like Google, Microsoft, and IBM are accelerating research, with breakthroughs like Microsoft’s Majorana 1 chip and Google’s Willow chip making waves.

However, leading analysts and cryptographers urge a more measured perspective. Most experts agree that a cryptographically relevant quantum computer (CRQC)—one powerful enough to break Bitcoin’s ECDSA encryption—is not expected in 2026.

The Immense Engineering Hurdle

The gap between today’s prototypes and the machine needed to threaten Bitcoin is vast. Breaking a single Bitcoin private key is estimated to require a fault-tolerant quantum computer with 1,500 to 3,000 logical qubits. A logical qubit is a stable, error-corrected unit of quantum information. Current hardware is in the Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) era, where we have hundreds to a few thousand physical qubits with high error rates. It can take 1,000 or more noisy physical qubits to create a single stable logical qubit.

Reality Check (Late 2025): The most powerful systems have around 1,500 physical qubits. Creating the millions of physical qubits needed for thousands of logical ones is a challenge spanning physics, materials science, and engineering. As one expert noted, “The bottleneck is not just engineering — it is the fundamental physics of the universe”.

Table: The Quantum Computing Gap to Break Bitcoin

Given this, credible estimates from firms like Grayscale and experts like Adam Back place the timeline for a real quantum threat to Bitcoin somewhere between 2030 and 2040+.

The Real 2026 Threat: “Harvest Now, Decrypt Later”

While a direct attack in 2026 is unlikely, a more insidious threat is already active: the “Harvest Now, Decrypt Later” (HNDL) attack. In this scenario, adversaries—which could include corporations or nation-states—are systematically collecting and storing public cryptographic data from the Bitcoin blockchain today.

Every time a transaction is made from a non-secure address, the public key is exposed on the public ledger. An attacker can archive this data, waiting for the day when a powerful enough quantum computer is built to run Shor’s algorithm and retroactively derive the private keys from all the harvested public keys. This creates a “ticking time bomb” for any funds in vulnerable addresses.

Your Bitcoin’s Vulnerability: A Self-Assessment Guide

Not all Bitcoins are equally at risk. Your exposure depends almost entirely on two factors: the type of address holding your coins and your transaction behavior.

Table: Bitcoin Address Vulnerability to Quantum Attack

The Satoshi Nakamoto Wildcard

A compelling and high-stakes subplot is the fate of the estimated 1.1 million BTC mined by Bitcoin’s anonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. These coins are stored in early P2PK addresses, making them prime, high-value targets. The moment these coins move—whether by Satoshi or a quantum attacker—would send an undeniable shockwave through the crypto world, potentially shaking global confidence in the network.

The Path to Survival: Migrating to Post-Quantum Cryptography

The solution to the quantum threat is not to abandon cryptography but to evolve it. The field of post-quantum cryptography (PQC) is dedicated to developing new algorithms that are secure against both classical and quantum attacks. Major institutions like the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have already standardized PQC algorithms like CRYSTALS-Dilithium for digital signatures.

For Bitcoin, the upgrade path is conceptually clear but practically challenging:

1. Develop & Agree: The community must agree on a new, quantum-resistant digital signature algorithm (e.g., lattice-based or hash-based).

2. Implement via Soft-Fork: Introduce the new algorithm through a backward-compatible soft-fork, creating new, quantum-safe address types.

3. The Great Migration: Incentivize all users to move their funds from old, vulnerable addresses to the new quantum-resistant ones within a defined grace period.

The final challenge is the “migration dilemma.” What about the billions in Bitcoin held in vulnerable addresses whose private keys are lost? The community may face a hard choice: accept that those coins will be stolen when Q-Day arrives, or implement a consensus rule to invalidate transactions from old address types after a deadline, effectively burning the immovable coins to protect the network’s overall integrity.

Who Will Be Ready? The Quantum Alliance

Initiatives like the Quantum Alliance—a coalition of projects like Quantum EVM, QRL, and Cellframe—are already building quantum-safe blockchains from the ground up. Their existence highlights a critical divergence: will established chains like Bitcoin upgrade in time, or will the next generation of quantum-native chains seize the market?

The 2026 Outlook: Market Impact and Strategic Actions

Despite the technical buzz, major financial analysts like Grayscale do not expect the quantum threat to influence crypto prices in 2026. In their 2026 Digital Asset Outlook, they label quantum computing a “red herring” for the year’s market dynamics, focusing instead on institutional adoption and regulatory clarity as primary price drivers.

Your Actionable Defense Plan

For investors and users, 2026 should be a year of preparation, not panic. Here is your actionable checklist:

• Audit Your Holdings: Use a block explorer to check if your Bitcoin addresses are legacy P2PK or have been reused. Move funds from these addresses immediately.

• Adopt Modern Wallet Practices: Always use modern SegWit (Bech32) addresses. Never reuse an address for receiving funds. A fresh address for every transaction is your best defense.

• Stay Informed on PQC: Follow Bitcoin Improvement Proposals (BIPs) related to post-quantum cryptography. The upgrade will require broad community support.

• Diversify with Awareness: Consider a small allocation to projects in the Quantum Alliance or others that are proactively implementing quantum resistance, treating them as a hedge against technological risk.

The Mechanics of the Quantum Threat: How Bitcoin’s Lock Gets Picked

To understand the threat, you must first understand what’s being attacked. Bitcoin’s security rests on two cryptographic pillars: the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) for signatures and SHA-256 for hashing. Your ownership is proven by a digital signature created with your private key. The security guarantee is simple: it is mathematically infeasible for any classical computer to derive the private key from the publicly visible public key.

Quantum computers change this game entirely by exploiting the laws of subatomic physics.

Quantum vs. Classical: A Fundamental Shift

• Classical Computers use bits (0s and 1s). Solving a cryptographic puzzle is like searching for a single specific key in a universe-sized dark room with a flashlight, checking one key at a time.

• Quantum Computers use qubits. Thanks to superposition, a qubit can be 0, 1, or both simultaneously. Thanks to entanglement, qubits can be linked to share information instantly. This allows them to, in effect, search the entire dark room at once.

Shor’s Algorithm: The Digital Lockpick

In 1994, mathematician Peter Shor devised an algorithm that runs efficiently on a quantum computer. Shor’s Algorithm specifically solves the “hard” mathematical problems (like integer factorization and discrete logarithms) that ECDSA is based on. In practice, this means:

A sufficiently powerful quantum computer running Shor’s algorithm could derive a private key from its corresponding public key, allowing an attacker to forge signatures and spend anyone’s Bitcoin.

Grover’s Algorithm: Speeding Up the Brute Force

While Shor’s targets signatures, Grover’s Algorithm offers a quadratic speedup for brute-force searches, such as reversing hash functions. It could reduce the effective security of SHA-256 from 256 bits to 128 bits. This is concerning but not catastrophic; the network could mitigate it by switching to a longer hash (like SHA-512). The existential threat comes from Shor’s, not Grover’s.

The $40 Billion Question: Which Bitcoins Are Actually Vulnerable?

Not all Bitcoin is equally at risk. The vulnerability depends entirely on one factor: whether the public key is exposed on the blockchain. Here’s the breakdown:

High-Risk: The “Sitting Ducks” (Approx. 4+ Million BTC)

• Legacy Pay-to-Public-Key (P2PK) Addresses: Used predominantly in Bitcoin’s first year (2009-2010). The public key is stored directly on the blockchain. This includes the estimated 1.1 million BTC mined by Satoshi Nakamoto. These coins are vulnerable right now if a quantum computer existed.

• Reused Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) Addresses: Modern wallets hash the public key to create an address. The public key is only revealed when you first spend from that address. If you receive new funds to an address you’ve already spent from, the public key is now known, making it vulnerable.

Table 1: Bitcoin Vulnerability by Address Type

The “Harvest Now, Decrypt Later” (HNDL) Trap

This is the most insidious near-term threat. The entire Bitcoin blockchain is public. An adversary can download it today and harvest all exposed public keys. They then simply store this data, waiting for the day a quantum computer is built that can run Shor’s algorithm. At that moment, they can instantly compute the private keys and steal the funds. This makes the transition to quantum-safe cryptography a race against time.

The 2026 Timeline: Engineering Breakthrough or Marketing Hype?

This is the core of the debate. Will 2026 be the year? Let’s examine the evidence from both sides.

The Case FOR a 2026-2028 Threat Window

• AI Acceleration: The synergy is a game-changer. AI neural networks are now used for real-time qubit error correction and designing more stable quantum chip architectures. This feedback loop is accelerating progress from a “physics problem” to a pure “engineering challenge”.

• Expert Warnings: Vitalik Buterin and quantum computing professor Scott Aaronson have pointed to a pre-2028 timeline for fault-tolerant machines capable of running Shor’s.

• Corporate Roadmaps: Tech giants like Google and IBM have aggressive multi-year roadmaps targeting million-qubit machines by the early 2030s.

• Financial Incentive: The first entity to break Bitcoin’s encryption could potentially access over $40 billion in vulnerable coins. The potential ROI drives investment and secrecy.

The Case AGAINST a 2026 Break

• The Immense Qubit Gap: Breaking Bitcoin’s 256-bit ECDSA requires a fault-tolerant quantum computer with millions of physical qubits. Microsoft research estimated a need for ~2,330 logical (error-corrected) qubits, which translates to millions of noisy physical qubits. As of late 2025, the most powerful processors have just over 1,500 physical qubits.

• The Error Correction Bottleneck: Qubits are notoriously unstable (“noisy”). Creating one stable “logical” qubit requires potentially thousands of error-prone physical qubits. This overhead is the primary technical hurdle.

• Skeptical Industry Voices: Blockstream CEO Adam Back believes a cryptographically relevant threat is 20-40 years away. Grayscale’s 2026 outlook labeled quantum a non-issue for near-term prices.

• The Logistical Impossibility: Jumping from ~1,500 physical qubits to the required millions within 12 months is not feasible given current manufacturing and cooling constraints.

Verdict: While breakthroughs are happening, the consensus among cryptographers is that 2026 is too early for a network-breaking event. The more likely “danger zone” begins in the 2030-2035 timeframe. However, preparation must start now.

The Mitigation Playbook: How Bitcoin Can Survive and Adapt

Bitcoin is not a static protocol. Its community has a proven track record of adapting under consensus. The path to quantum resilience involves both immediate user actions and long-term protocol upgrades.

Immediate User Actions (Quick Wins)

1. NEVER Reuse Addresses: This is the single most important practice. Use a fresh address for every receipt of funds. Most modern wallets do this automatically.

2. Move Funds from Legacy Wallets: If you hold Bitcoin in a very old wallet (pre-2010), assume it’s a P2PK address. Move those funds to a modern, SegWit-compatible wallet that uses single-use P2PKH or Taproot addresses.

3. Stay Informed on Wallet Updates: As quantum-resistant signature schemes (like SLH-DSA) are standardized, wallet providers will integrate them. Be prepared to migrate when recommended.

Long-Term Protocol Solutions

• Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC): The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has already standardized quantum-resistant algorithms like CRYSTALS-Dilithium. These are mathematical problems believed to be hard even for quantum computers.

• The Upgrade Path: Bitcoin could integrate PQC through a soft fork. Proposals like BIP360 (QuBit) already exist to introduce post-quantum public keys. The upgrade would likely involve a transitional period where both old (ECDSA) and new (PQC) signatures are accepted.

• The Governance Challenge: This is the biggest hurdle. Achieving consensus in a decentralized ecosystem is slow and difficult. A successful upgrade requires coordination among miners, nodes, exchanges, and wallet developers. The cultural resistance to change within Bitcoin is a real risk.

A Realistic Migration Scenario

1. Consensus & Development (2026-2030): The community agrees on a standardized PQC scheme and developers implement it in Bitcoin Core.

2. Soft Fork Activation (2030-2035): A soft fork is activated, creating a new, quantum-safe address type.

3. Grace Period & Migration: Users are given a multi-year window to move their funds from old-style addresses to the new quantum-safe addresses.

4. Sunset of Vulnerable Transactions: After the grace period, miners could agree to stop processing transactions from legacy, vulnerable address types, forcing the migration of any remaining funds.

Beyond 2026: The Broader Implications for Web3 and Finance

The quantum threat isn’t exclusive to Bitcoin; it’s a systemic risk to all digital security.

• Ethereum and Smart Contracts: Ethereum faces the same ECDSA vulnerability. However, its more flexible upgrade mechanism could allow for a faster transition, though its complex smart contract ecosystem creates additional challenges.

• The Entire Internet: Banking, secure communications, and data privacy all rely on the same cryptographic primitives. A “Q-Day” would be a global digital security crisis.

• A Catalyst for Innovation: This threat is driving the creation of quantum-resistant blockchains (like The QRL and Quantum EVM) and advanced cryptography like fully homomorphic encryption.

Conclusion

The narrative that quantum computing will break Bitcoin is powerful, but the reality is more nuanced. 2026 is not the doomsday year. However, it is a critical warning siren. The technology that could break Bitcoin’s ECDSA encryption is advancing, and the “harvest now, decrypt later” attack is already underway.

The crypto industry now faces its greatest test of adaptation. The imperative to adopt post-quantum cryptography is clear. The coming decade will separate the agile from the obsolete. For the informed investor, this isn’t just a threat—it’s a framework for future-proofing your portfolio and supporting the resilient evolution of decentralized technology.

The question “Will quantum computing break Bitcoin in 2026?” has a nuanced answer. A catastrophic, network-breaking event in 2026 is highly improbable. The engineering hurdles remain too great. However, dismissing the threat as pure hype is a dangerous mistake.

The timeline is contracting, not expanding. The fusion of AI and quantum research is accelerating progress. The HNDL attack vector is active today, and a significant portion of Bitcoin’s supply is already technically vulnerable.

For the savvy investor and community member, the course is clear:

1. Follow Best Practices: Never reuse addresses.

2. Demand Transparency: Ask your wallet and exchange providers about their quantum readiness roadmap.

3. Support Development: Engage with and fund initiatives focused on post-quantum cryptography for Bitcoin.

4. Think Long-Term: View this as a multi-decade security challenge that requires proactive, coordinated action.

Bitcoin has survived countless predictions of its demise. Its greatest strength is its adaptive, decentralized governance. The quantum threat is perhaps its most formidable technical challenge yet, but it is not insurmountable. The countdown hasn’t reached zero, but the clock is ticking. The time to prepare is now.

The clock is ticking. Is your Bitcoin strategy quantum-ready?

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Could quantum computers break Bitcoin encryption?

Yes, but not all of it. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could break the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) used to secure wallets and authorize transactions by deriving private keys from public keys. However, the SHA-256 hash function used in mining is much more resilient, with quantum algorithms only offering a quadratic speedup, not a complete break.

How long would it take a quantum computer to crack 256-bit encryption?

The time required depends entirely on the power (number of stable logical qubits) of the quantum computer. Current estimates suggest a machine would need 1,500-3,000 logical qubits to break a Bitcoin key. With today’s technology, it’s impossible. If such a machine existed, some calculations predict it could derive a private key in as little as 30 minutes to 8 hours, highlighting the danger if the computation time drops below Bitcoin’s 10-minute block time.

Can quantum computers break Bitcoin’s ECDSA encryption?

Yes, this is the primary and most severe threat. Shor’s algorithm, run on a cryptographically relevant quantum computer, is specifically efficient at solving the mathematical problem that secures ECDSA, allowing private keys to be calculated from public keys.

Why should the crypto industry adopt post-quantum cryptography?

The industry must adopt PQC to ensure long-term survival and maintain trust. With a “harvest now, decrypt later” attack already possible, delaying the transition leaves billions in assets vulnerable to future theft. Proactively upgrading is a necessary investment in the security and credibility of blockchain-based finance.

Is my Bitcoin safe from quantum computers right now?

For most users, yes, for now. If you use a modern wallet (post-2013) and have never reused a Bitcoin address, your public key is not exposed on the blockchain, making it safe from current quantum capabilities. However, coins stored in very old “legacy” addresses or in addresses you’ve spent from multiple times are theoretically vulnerable if a powerful enough quantum computer existed today.

What happens to Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1 million Bitcoin?

Satoshi’s coins are stored in early P2PK addresses, meaning their public keys are fully visible on the blockchain. They are considered the highest-value target for a future quantum attack. Their movement would signal a major security breach. Some analysts, like Willy Woo, suggest that if these coins were ever stolen via quantum attack, long-term Bitcoin believers (“OGs”) might buy the discounted supply, seeing it as a one-time event rather than a network failure.

Can Bitcoin’s code be changed to be quantum-resistant?

Yes, absolutely. Bitcoin can be upgraded via a soft fork to incorporate post-quantum cryptographic algorithms that are secure against both classical and quantum computers. NIST has already standardized such algorithms (e.g., CRYSTALS-Dilithium). The main challenge is not the technology but achieving the necessary consensus across the decentralized network to implement the change.

Should I sell my Bitcoin because of the quantum threat?

Based on current expert analysis, this is not a near-term reason to sell. The consensus among researchers and firms like Grayscale is that a cryptographically relevant quantum computer is unlikely to appear this decade, and thus should not affect market valuations in 2026. The prudent action is to ensure your storage practices are secure (no address reuse) and stay informed about protocol development.

How does AI make the quantum threat worse?

AI is dramatically accelerating quantum computing progress. It is used for real-time qubit error correction (making noisy hardware more stable) and for designing more efficient quantum chip architectures. This creates a feedback loop where AI helps build better quantum computers, which in turn can train more powerful AI, potentially shortening the development timeline.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute financial, investment, or security advice. The field of quantum computing is rapidly evolving, and all timelines are estimates. You should conduct your own research and consult with independent financial and security professionals before making any investment decisions or changes to your security practices. The author and publisher are not responsible for any investment losses or security breaches.