Slashdot Mirror
BlackBerry Races Ahead of Security Curve With Quantum-Resistant Solution (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Quantum computing represents tremendous promise to completely alter technology as we've known it, allowing operations that weren't previously possible with traditional computing. The downside of these powerful machines is that they could be strong enough to break conventional cryptography schemes. Today, BlackBerry announced a new quantum-resistant code signing service to help battle that possibility. The solution, which will be available next month, is actually the product of a partnership between BlackBerry and Isara Corporation, a company whose mission is to build quantum-safe security solutions. BlackBerry is using Isara's cryptographic libraries to help sign and protect code as security evolves.
"By adding the quantum-resistant code signing server to our cybersecurity tools, we will be able to address a major security concern for industries that rely on assets that will be in use for a long time. If your product, whether it's a car or critical piece of infrastructure, needs to be functional 10-15 years from now, you need to be concerned about quantum computing attacks," Charles Eagan, BlackBerry's chief technology officer, said in a statement. Some of the long-lived assets include aerospace equipment, connected cars, or transportation infrastructure -- basically anything that will still be in use several years from now when quantum computing attacks are expected to emerge.
"By adding the quantum-resistant code signing server to our cybersecurity tools, we will be able to address a major security concern for industries that rely on assets that will be in use for a long time. If your product, whether it's a car or critical piece of infrastructure, needs to be functional 10-15 years from now, you need to be concerned about quantum computing attacks," Charles Eagan, BlackBerry's chief technology officer, said in a statement. Some of the long-lived assets include aerospace equipment, connected cars, or transportation infrastructure -- basically anything that will still be in use several years from now when quantum computing attacks are expected to emerge.
Why would anyone trust them after this article:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/t...
How is this better than AES-CMAC?
Quantum only affects asymmetric cypher's mainly used for key distribution as far as I know.
Symmetric cypher's like AES should be unaffected if you just up the number of bits a bit.
Those last 2 sentences read like the blurb you get when someone is just randomly adding technical words to something to make it sound like it actually is something worth having, but isn't.
Giving the benefit of the doubt here, does anyone have any links to technical papers about this quantum-resistant cryptographic solution?
It's simple. To make their hardware quantum-resistant they simply pushed it into the super position of being both off and on but unused. Their next step is to involve concrete.
Who's CEO doesn't like encryption without backdoors.
BlackBerry Races Ahead of Security Curve With Quantum-Resistant Solution
So, does mean they won't run the latest versions of Firefox?
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
It's a quantum resistant solution.
Err How does it work, what makes it quantum resistant, how long is it expected to be resistant
***Crickets****
Might as well be a press release for Blackberry.
If your product, whether it's a car or critical piece of infrastructure, needs to be functional 10-15 years from now
What do you mean, if it needs to be functional 10 years from now? My car IS 10 years old and in perfect working condition. It better damn well last another decade (barring people slamming into me which has happened).
This is the problem with technology. Anything over six months old is considered not worth it to keep around. A three year-old product is considered ancient.
They probably don't actually employ anyone who is qualified to create the next generation of cryptography. This is just a snake oil salesman unless they share precisely what they've built with the entire world.
The same BlackBerry that enthusiastically supported government back-dooring before it was cool? No thanks.
On the positive side, this article has informed me that it's probably also unsafe to use anything from their partner, Isara Corporation. Another name for my shit-list.
Hm. Your .sig claims that you are Slashdot. That's interesting.
and check that it matches what you expect. It could be automated in your build scripts. There's no need for a public-private key pair to validate source code integrity. (Yeah, that's not really signing, but it IS practical.)
Luckily I'm not alone here, but JFTR: I don't care about regurgitated press releases. What does "quantum resistant" mean? What's behind that marketing mumbo-jumbo? Is it just something thought to be resistant against Shor's algorithm[1]? Or which one of those[2] is it?
Facts, please (and no alternative facts, please). There are enough snake oil vendors out there already.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If your product, whether it's a car or critical piece of infrastructure, needs to be functional 10-15 years from now, you need to disconnect it from an insecure network like the internet.
It IS actually that simple!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Blackberry stopped being a company that one could trust to be secure when they started bending over for government agencies. Clearly they do not understand security if they expect to be able to break their own encryption for law enforcement purposes while still maintaining security for everyone else, all it takes is a 5 dollar wrench approach to the right employee.
If they are trying to regain trust in the industry then they need to open source their code for public review and contribution in order to start wining back the trust they lost.
They could actually be onto something here but i don't see how anyone with the smallest bit of technical aptitude could trust them after the things that they have publicly announced so that they could target specific markets. Whats to stop them from trading security for market share once again?
Kill the brand, its done, put it out of its misery. the best bet now is to chop it all up, sell off the parts into new companies with new leadership as there is no coming back from the extreme loss of trust.
Does quantum encryption solve the key escrow problem? Or would not implementing key escrow be necessary for that?
After what happened with BlackBerry, why would I trust anything they say or do? They are as trustworthy as RSA which is to say, not trustworthy at all.