Bitcoin has been presenting itself for years as a decentralized system, resilient by design and less exposed to the single points of failure that affect traditional banking. The idea is powerful and, to a large extent, true. But it has an important nuance that is usually left out of the conversation: to function, Bitcoin continues to rely on a very specific physical infrastructure that connects the world and that also conditions its real resistance.
The study that puts figures on resilience. A study by the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance, based on eleven years of network traffic and 68 real cable incidents, explains something very interesting. The significant disconnection threshold of the clearnet of Bitcoin is between 72% and 92% of submarine cables in random failure scenarios. However, the same work introduces a decisive nuance: this solidity changes noticeably when the problem is no longer random.
Decentralization, but not isolation. Just because Bitcoin does not have a central authority does not mean that it works independently of other infrastructures. Its network is made up of distributed nodes that constantly exchange information, but they do so through providers, routes and physical systems that also support the Internet. The Cambridge study itself highlights this interdependence between layers, where the logical and the material coexist.
For this distributed network to work, the nodes need to continuously exchange data, and that occurs over a global infrastructure shared with the rest of the Internet. We are talking about submarine cables, terrestrial links, service providers and routing systems that determine where information circulates. Bitcoin’s resilience, according to the study, depends largely on how all these components are organized and connected.
Where everything changes is in targeted attacks. Compared to the resistance shown in random scenarios, the study warns of a much more accessible vulnerability when the attack focuses on large ASNs or key routing infrastructures. Damaging cables indiscriminately is not the same as hitting specific surfaces of the network, and this difference paints a very different scenario from that of massive and indiscriminate failures.
Researchers support their conclusions with documented events. One of the most significant is the cable cutting recorded on March 14, 2024 off the Ivory Coast, which affected multiple countries in the region. On a global scale, the impact on the Bitcoin network was minuscule, although at a regional level the consequences were much more visible.
Tor’s role in resilience. The study identifies another element that influences the robustness of the network: the growing use of the Tor protocol. According to their data, in 2025 around 64% of Bitcoin nodes will already operate through this network and, in the four-layer model used by researchers, this evolution not only does not weaken the infrastructure, but rather increases its resilience against cable cuts under the current geography of the relays.
So, overall, the study paints a less intuitive scenario than is usually proposed. Bitcoin does not seem particularly exposed to a collapse caused by massive and indiscriminate failures in the global infrastructure, but rather to much more focused disruptions. The key, according to researchers, is not so much in the scale of the damage as in where it occurs, which forces us to rethink how we understand its resilience.
Images | Jen Titus | Erling Løken Andersen
In WorldOfSoftware | Seedance 2.0 has used Hollywood intellectual property to go viral. Hollywood has used the courts
