From discussion to implementation: How can IDN proactively prepare for the quantum-safe era

From a tweet by Sun Yuchen, see the industry’s direction of divergence

Recently, a statement by Sun Yuchen on a social media platform has drawn widespread attention across the industry.

He mentioned that while Bitcoin is still debating whether to freeze quantum-vulnerable addresses, and while Ethereum is still setting up research committees, TRON has already launched an anti-quantum upgrade plan and will become the first mainstream public chain to deploy a NIST standard-based quantum signature scheme on its mainnet.

More importantly, the key sentence is: “Quantum security shouldn’t be a debate; it should be a functionality.”

This sentence looks simple, but in reality it has already made the industry’s logic of divergence clear.

The real gap isn’t in technology, but in whether to act

In the past, the Web3 industry was accustomed to putting security issues on the “future agenda.” The reason is very realistic: in the short term, risks are not visible, and in the long term there is a lack of urgency.

So a very typical phenomenon has emerged: Most projects are discussing, a small number are preparing, and an extremely small number of projects have already started taking action.

Sun Yuchen’s remarks are, in essence, not about technology; they are about emphasizing a gap in capability: Who is preparing early, and who is waiting for problems to happen.

From a historical perspective, every time a technological paradigm changes, it goes through similar stages. Early investment that seems “unnecessary” often becomes, at some point, a threshold that “must be completed.”

Quantum security is very likely to be the next such watershed.

IDN’s path: turning “future risk” into “current structure”

Against this backdrop, when you look at the overall design of IDN Network, you’ll find that its logic is highly aligned with this trend.

IDN did not treat security as a module to be added later. Instead, it designed the system holistically from the ground up around encryption capabilities, computing power support, and data distribution. The core of this approach is not to deal with a specific problem, but to ensure that the system still holds up when the technical environment changes in the future.

In other words, it is not “solving problems,” but “preventing problems from occurring.”

At the same time, at the user level, IDN uses a wallet system as a unified entry point to integrate asset management, interaction behavior, and security mechanisms into the same structure. This means security no longer relies on users’ own operations, but becomes part of the system.

This contrasts with another common pattern in the industry: One is to let users bear the security risk themselves, The other is to make the system itself possess security capabilities.

The gap between the two will be rapidly magnified in extreme environments.

Why this matters is more urgent than most people think

The market often underestimates risks that “won’t happen right away.”

When the market is doing well, security issues hardly ever become a focus of discussion. But once there is a sudden shift in technology or the environment, security issues tend to appear in the most severe way.

The impact brought by quantum computing may not fully erupt in the short term, but once it becomes real, the impact will be systemic rather than something that can be fixed with local patchwork.

This means the logic of future competition is changing: Not just “who is faster, who is cheaper,” but who can still operate stably under extreme conditions.

And this kind of capability cannot be made up for in a short period of time.

Conclusion: The industry is entering an “early-mover quantity” competition era

Sun Yuchen’s line has essentially already pointed out the trend: Security is no longer a topic of discussion; it is a capability requirement.

The industry is entering a new stage— In the past, it was about speed and scale, Now it starts to be about judgment and having a head start.

When most projects are still debating whether upgrades are needed, a small number of projects have already turned future problems into today’s structure.

The path chosen by IDN Network is unfolding precisely under this logic. It does not pursue short-term narrative advantages, but is trying to build a system that will remain valid in future environments.

This path may not be the fastest, but it is likely harder to replace.

In an ever-changing technological world, taking a step ahead is often the decisive difference.