No, the sky isn't falling, but Q Day is coming, and it won't be as expensive as thought.

all 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 8 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

Doesn’t quantum proof encryption exist already? I thought I learned that in college more than a decade ago… The only reason its not viable yet is because hardware was not powerful enough to run it without being slow.

I could be misremembering though its been a long time

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 7 months ago* (1 child)

    It does and many security or privacy oriented services have already implemented post quantum encryption, but majority of the internet still relies on AES-256 or similar if not worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 7 months ago

    AES-256 is fine actually. The best known quantum attack reduces key strength from 256 bits to 254.4 bits. The problem is that in order to use AES (which is a symmetric encryption scheme) you need to exchange keys using an asymmetric system like RSA, which is known to be weak to quantum attacks.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    It's kind of ironic that quantum computers seem to exist and not exist at the same time.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Crypto currency is so intertwined with the global economy and major banks that proof of a hacked bitcoin address would destroy the world's markets overnight

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Why the focus on breaking encryption. Can these computers not be used for better things

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    In a perfect world, yes. But instead, we have countries like Russia (and probably now the US) which would love to use this technology for nefarious purposes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 months ago

    more hype and no practical results

  • source
  • 6 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 21 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah as soon as someone fixes the instability of quantum computing to the point u can get enough qbits. This story has been going on for 30 years now. But just to be safe its nice to see places slowly moving to post quantum encryption a lot of things have already made the leap

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 31 points 7 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 34 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    Cool. Call me once they do break traditional encryption with a quantum computer.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 1 comment in c/hardware@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] [S] 7 points 7 months ago

    “While CRQCs certainly do pose a threat to blockchain-based technologies based on classical ECC algorithms, they are just one of many systems in our modern world that need to transition quickly to PQC,” LaMacchia said, referring to post-quantum cryptography. “Especially when reading some of the policy proposals at the end of the white paper, I am just dumbfounded that Google is focused on policy frameworks for solving problems that seem unique to the cryptocurrency space (e.g., salvaged digital assets) and not the general threat that CRQC pose to all our systems that use public-key cryptography.”

    Sounds like they are trying to suck up to the current US administration.

    Countries and societies that value liberal democracy and believe in freedom (in the real sense, not the American polemical sense) really need to get rid of all American technology services and platforms.

  • source