Bitcoin’s P2MR and Ethereum’s multisig: how two chains are splitting post-quantum security

The **P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. The **P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption. **The P2MR proposal**, Bitcoin’s first step toward post-quantum security, does not add quantum-resistant signatures but instead lets multisig wallets verify alternative signatures. This is a critical distinction: while Ethereum’s multisig contracts already support alternative signatures via EIP-712, Bitcoin’s approach requires a separate upgrade path. The divergence matters. As of 14:00 UTC Oct 23, 2026, Bitcoin’s dominance remains at 59.5%, but the technical split in quantum security strategies could reshape long-term adoption.