Quantum Computing Regulation Already?

RMX writes "A new CNet article discusses the possibility of regulating quantum computing. We already see our top tier US VCs investing in Quantum computing companies outside the country. Apparently the feds seem to think regulating the amount of technology that can be sent overseas will make the US safer." From the article: "Only rough prototypes of quantum computers presently exist. But if a large-scale model can be built, in theory it could break codes used to scramble information on the Internet, in banking, and within federal agencies. A certain class of encryption algorithms relies for security on the near-impossibility of factoring large numbers quickly. But quantum computers, at least on paper, can do that calculation millions of times faster than a conventional microprocessor. "

Comments

Catch 22

[roman_mir]

By reading the regulations we change them, so we can't ever know what they actually are.

On Paper?

[ufamsm]

"quantum computers, at least on paper, can do that calculation millions of times faster than a conventional microprocessor."
Wow, imagine what they can do on silicone!

Re:On Paper?

[richdun]

Or even on silicon!

Though what they can do with silicone may be much more, uh, er, entertaining.

Re:On Paper?

[Jerry Coffin]

Or even on silicon!

I know you meant this humorously, but it's probably worth noting that in reality, the quantum computers that have been built are NOT in silicon either -- in fact, they're not really based on semiconductors at all.

They're currently (basically) a test-tube full of specially constructed "soup" of (for example) hydrogen and carbon-14 (yes, the same that's used for carbon dating) suspended in chloroform. The results from this are read using an NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) machine, essentially like those used in medical imaging.

Unfortunately, even the people doing research in this direction admit that there's little likelihood of building NMR based quantum computers of more than a few (half a dozen or so) qubits, which is really too small to do much -- and the NMR-based reading of the results is also quite slow. OTOH, while they may not be particularly practical, they have managed to do real quantum computation this way.

--
The universe is a figment of its own imagination.

It won't be surprising when it's illegal to own

[saskboy]

I have no doubt the USA, Canada, and the UK will make it illegal to own one to keep code breaking superiority with the governments' spies, rather than criminal organizations.

Does this mean that I shouldn't bother with a 28 character bank password, since it's all going to be moot anyway?

Setec Astronomy

[TripMaster Monkey]

The summary is a bit fuzy on the details, but here's a telling excerpt from the IBM research article on their quantum computer (link here):

A quantum computer gets its power by taking advantage of certain quantum properties of atoms or nuclei that allow them to work together as quantum bits, or "qubits," which serve simultaneously as the computer's processor and memory . By directing the interactions between qubits while keeping them isolated from the external environment, scientists enable a quantum computer to perform certain calculations, such as factoring, exponentially faster than conventional computers. When factoring large numbers using a conventional computer, each added digit roughly doubles the time to find the factors. In contrast, the quantum factoring time increases by only a constant increment with each additional digit.

This breakthrough completely renders useles the concept of the so-called one-way function, a function which can be executed in polynomial time, but whose inverse can be executed only in exponential time. Basically, this renders just about all public-key cryptographic functions obselete on one stroke.

Interesting times...

Re:Setec Astronomy

[Garse Janacek]

This breakthrough completely renders useles the concept of the so-called one-way function

Not at all -- if you believe that quantum computers will actually work well enough to factor in the real world (many computer scientists don't -- the degree of precision required would be many orders of magnitude greater than any observations of any physical laws have ever been in a real experiment), you're only talking about making some particular one-way functions (in this case, factoring) useless.

In fact, part of the power of quantum computing is that (even without the somewhat less plausible factoring algorithm) we would have real secure encryption -- secure based not on the assumption that factoring is hard (which it may not be), but that quantum physics is true (which it may not be, but a lot of people seem more comfortable with this assumption, at least as far as cryptography is involved).

Re:Setec Astronomy

[Rich0]

You are referring no doubt to quantum cryptography. This is an area which actually is only related to quantum computing loosely at best. We are already capable of implementing it somewhat practically - unlike quantum computing.

Quantum cryptography isn't really cryptography - it is instead a method of transmitting data between two points without relays which can allow sender and receiver to determine whether the transmission was intercepted. In practice it can be used for symmetric key exchange (such as a one time pad). If the key wasn't intercepted you use it, if it was then you just keep trying until the interceptor (or you) gives up.

The problem with quantum crypto is that it requires a direct transmission of photons from Alice to Bob. You can't have a relay station in-between, unless you are willing to guarantee its security (any relay station would allow for interception of the signal when it isn't entangled - which cannot be detected).

The bottom line right now is that it only works for very sensitive communications via line of sight or fiber optic. Most people submitting their credit card numbers to a website don't have a direct fiber optic line without retransmission between them and the merchant.

My guess is that quantum crypto won't ever prove to be very practical for general use - except maybe in space (where lines of sight extend much farther).

Why can't other countries develope their own?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if the US regulates what can be exported, how will that stop other countries from developing their own quantum computers with the same technology? We can't count on everyone else having slower computers if faster ones exist...

Re:Why can't other countries develope their own?

[Chris Burke]

Exactly. That's why restrictions on cryptography exports were lifted in the 90s, because the stupid assumption that nobody but Americans could develop strong cryptography was proven false. All the restrictions did was hinder U.S. companies in international markets.

Under the completely unresearched assumption that the U.S. currently has some lead in quantum computing, all restricting it can do is give some lead time before others catch up and then we have the same situation as we had with cryptography.

Though the article doesn't make it clear that export restrictions are going to be the main thrust. If they regulate quantum computers within the U.S... well, I can only imagine the justification (teh terrorists crack your bank account!), but the detrimental-to-U.S.-interests aspect will actually be amplified as the rest of the world uses the useful tool and the U.S. forbids it.

With any luck there will be an unexplainable outbreak of intelligence and sincerity in the government (or the appearance of such caused by commercial lobbyists) and no significant regulations come to pass.

If you outlaw quantum computing

[Anonymous Coward]

Only outlaws will have quantum computing.

Pah!

[Anonymous Coward]

Quantum mechanics is just a theory, so Quantum Computers will never work.

Like the Kansas Board of Education, we need to proactively discard these so-called "scientific theories" and go back to Intelligently Designed machines, like the abacus.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

[QuantaStarFire]

But if a large-scale model can be built, in theory it could break codes used to scramble information on the Internet, in banking, and within federal agencies.

Can't that same concept be applied to encrypting the data as well? I mean, if it can break current encryption easily, wouldn't the logic here be that it's capable of an encryption that would take even a quantum computer decades to crack? Or am I missing something here?

Re:Correct me if I'm wrong, but...

[TripMaster Monkey]

Actually, no. The breakthrough here isn't just a much faster computer...if that was the cse, you'd be right...just increase the length of your encryption key to compensate. The breakthrough here is a computer capable of solving formerly exponentially-difficult functions in polynomial time, rather than exponential time. It completely rewrites the rules.

Export restrictions has been a wrongheaded tack

[ReformedExCon]

In the current day and age where the act of putting up a webpage which can be accessed by anyone around the world with an internet connection is as easy as signing into www.blogspot.com, the effort involved in stopping technology leaks such as encryption far outweighs the benefit of keeping it secret. Relying on an encryption to be safe because the algorithm or solution method is secret is akin to hiding your housekey under your doormat. Somewhere along the line, someone's going to figure it out and you're totally at their mercy after that.

The solution, as it is in most cases of security, is to rely on methods that are simply and thoroughly uncrackable. As we saw the other day, the time to determine the factors of a 640 bit number is 5 months. As computers get faster and algorithms get better, that time will diminish. Once quantum computers arrive, those encryption algorithms will be obsolete.

So use encryption which is not vulnerable. Don't stop the free flow of information to hide your weaknesses.

You can't keep the cat in the bag

[tjstork]

Once someone builds a quantum computer, and of course, we know that people can build them, then, its obvious that all combinatorial based encryption schemes are doomed and should not be used. The internet as we know it is dead and its time to get over it and figure out where to go next.

Good luck with that

[HangingChad]

With much of our engineering outsourced to China and India and most of the companies producing the chips and components also located overseas, just how does the US government plan on keeping any technology bottled up over here? If we don't sell it to them someone else will. Just like the Japanese sold the Russians precision computer controlled mills that allowed the Russians to make their submarines quieter by orders of magnitude. The Japanese apologized for that, which made it all better.

It's the PGP Retardo Fed Fest all over again. Technology advances, you can only keep a secret for so long, especially depending on potentially hostile foreign governments making the devices or support devices. Particularly when those same potentially hostile governments have massive databases of information on US citizens conveniently supplied by US businesses outsourcing their data management.

Straining out a gnat while swallowing a camel. Deal with it and move along.

Major factors influencing the U.S. edge

[erroneus]

Once upon a time, the U.S. was, more or less, the technology leader. But trends changed when business believed they should cut R&D and all other aspects of doing business that requires technological expertise. (Cutting the numbers, outsourcing, etc) They did this for short-term profit to improve their stock values... whatever the reason, it is and has proven to be extremely short-sighted.

The result of this, the dot-com bubble bursting and perhaps a few things I can't think of at the moment, there is a massive brain-drain in the US. According to what I've read, there are fewer people signing up for technical careers. Meanwhile, in other countries, they are building their intellectual base to the point of being emerging superpowers.

I remember the U.S. encryption export laws (are they still on the books?) and the supposed reason they were put into place. (Was it to prevent competing nations from getting our superior encryption technology or was it so we could charge people with an additional crime for trafficking in secrets using a more secure tech?) I guess it's not a really good parallel, but I do beleive this type or restriction is a bit too little and too late. The genie is out of the bottle. And unless some serious focus on science, technology and research is made, I believe the U.S. will have lost its last great commodity -- intelligence. ...I don't know why or how, but some people got it in their heads that money and profits are more important than anything else INCLUDING those factors that lead to money and profits!

One Giant Assumption

[Nom du Keyboard]

This regulation makes one giant assumption: That the first feasible quantum computers will be developed and built here.

In a world of outsourcing to other countries, as well as the fact that the USA doesn't have a monopoly on brain power, this whole idea could be rendered meaningless the moment someone decides to build their Q-puter[tm] in any other country with less onerous regulations!