Chain profile
Signs with Ed25519 and has no published post-quantum roadmap, though its wallet-as-smart-contract model means a new signature scheme could be adopted without changing the protocol.
No. TON accounts are secured by Ed25519, which a sufficiently large quantum computer would break. We found no published post-quantum roadmap, named replacement scheme or research programme for TON at the time of writing. TON does have a structural property worth stating, because it is the same property that gives Ethereum and Starknet their migration route: on TON, a wallet is a smart contract, and the signature checking logic lives in that contract rather than being fixed by the protocol. In principle a new wallet contract could verify a post-quantum signature without any consensus change at all. That is genuine optionality, and it is not the same as a plan. We found no evidence of anyone having built or proposed such a wallet.
Where we are making a judgement call TON sits in Tier 5 because its mainnet signatures are quantum-vulnerable and no post-quantum roadmap, proposal or research programme was found. Its migration score of 3 is higher than peers with the same absence of a plan, because the wallet-as-contract architecture genuinely could support a post-quantum wallet without a consensus change. We are crediting the architecture, not treating it as progress.
Ed25519, verified inside wallet smart contracts
None proposed. No TON-specific post-quantum work was found.
None adopted
Tier 5: Exposed. The signatures securing funds on mainnet today are quantum-vulnerable, and no public post-quantum plan, proposal or research programme could be found.
| No. | Dimension | Score | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Signature scheme | 0 | 30% | 0.0 |
| 2 | Deployment stage | 1 | 25% | 2.5 |
| 3 | NIST alignment | 0 | 15% | 0.0 |
| 4 | Migration path | 3 | 15% | 4.5 |
| 5 | Exposure | 3 | 10% | 3.0 |
| 6 | Verification | 6 | 5% | 3.0 |
| Hardy Score | 13.0 | |||
TON wallets verify Ed25519 signatures, which are broken by Shor's algorithm. Nothing post-quantum protects TON on mainnet today. source
Tier 5: Exposed. TON signs with Ed25519 and no post-quantum roadmap, proposal or research programme was found. See the caveat below on its wallet architecture. source
No post-quantum scheme has been named or proposed for TON, so there is nothing to assess against a NIST standard. source
TON's wallets are smart contracts and the signature check lives in contract code, so a post-quantum wallet could in principle be deployed without a consensus change. That is a materially better structural position than a protocol-fixed signature scheme, but no plan, proposal or implementation was found. source
A TON address is derived from a hash of the wallet contract's initial state, which includes the public key, so the address does not publish the key directly. The key becomes visible once the wallet is deployed and used, which is true of essentially every funded wallet. source
The TON node implementation is open source and the signature scheme is verifiable from the code and from standard wallet contracts. There is no post-quantum claim to verify. source
The deployment dimension is not a separate judgement. It is Tier 5 expressed as a number. See the tier mapping.
No post-quantum roadmap, proposal or research programme for TON was found at the time of writing. source
Exposure measures how much of the chain's value already sits behind a public key that an attacker can record today and break later. This is the part of the threat that a future upgrade cannot undo.
A TON wallet address is derived from a hash of the contract's initial state, which embeds the owner's public key, so the address itself does not hand an attacker the key. In practice the key becomes readable once the wallet contract is deployed on-chain, and a wallet must be deployed to be used, so essentially every funded and active TON wallet has a visible key that can be recorded today. The position is somewhat better than chains where the address simply is the key, and considerably worse than a UTXO chain where unspent funds keep their keys private.
What this rating means for you
TON runs quantum-vulnerable signatures with no published post-quantum plan that we could find. Nothing here is urgent today, and there is also nothing scheduled to change it.
Editorial guidance from the Hardy Index. Nothing on this profile is sponsored and nothing on it is an affiliate link. The guides carry disclosed affiliate links, which never affect a rating. How we make money.
No. TON wallets verify Ed25519 signatures, which a sufficiently large quantum computer would break. We found no published post-quantum roadmap or proposal for TON at the time of writing.
In principle yes, and this is TON's main structural advantage. Wallets on TON are smart contracts and the signature verification happens in contract code rather than in the protocol, so a new wallet contract could verify a post-quantum signature without a consensus change. No such wallet has been proposed or built as far as we could find.
Only slightly. A TON address is a hash of the wallet contract's initial state, which contains the public key, so the address does not reveal the key directly. But a wallet contract has to be deployed on-chain to be used, and once deployed the key is readable, so nearly all active wallets are exposed.
A published position would raise the tier. A proposed or deployed post-quantum wallet contract would raise the signature and NIST dimensions substantially, and because that route needs no consensus change, TON could move faster than chains that must coordinate a protocol upgrade.
This is a security-readiness assessment, not investment advice.