Slashdot Mirror
Quantum Computers Pose a Security Threat That We're Still Totally Unprepared For (technologyreview.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from MIT Technology Review: The world relies on encryption to protect everything from credit card transactions to databases holding health records and other sensitive information. A new report from the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine says we need to speed up preparations for the time when super-powerful quantum computers can crack conventional cryptographic defenses. The experts who produced the report, which was released today, say widespread adoption of quantum-resistant cryptography "will be a long and difficult process" that "probably cannot be completed in less than 20 years." It's possible that highly capable quantum machines will appear before then, and if hackers get their hands on them, the result could be a security and privacy nightmare.
Today's cyberdefenses rely heavily on the fact that it would take even the most powerful classical supercomputers almost unimaginable amounts of time to unravel the cryptographic algorithms that protect our data, computer networks, and other digital systems. But computers that harness quantum bits, or qubits, promise to deliver exponential leaps in processing power that could break today's best encryption. The report cites an example of encryption that protects the process of swapping identical digital keys between two parties, who use them to decrypt secure messages sent to one another. A powerful quantum computer could crack RSA-1024, a popular algorithmic defense for this process, in less than a day. The U.S., Israel and others are working to develop standards for quantum-proof cryptographic algorithms, but they may not be ready or widely adopted by the time quantum computers arrive.
"[I]t will take at least a couple of decades to get quantum-safe cryptography broadly in place," the report says in closing. "If that holds, we're going have to hope it somehow takes even longer before a powerful quantum computer ends up in a malicious hacker's hands."
Today's cyberdefenses rely heavily on the fact that it would take even the most powerful classical supercomputers almost unimaginable amounts of time to unravel the cryptographic algorithms that protect our data, computer networks, and other digital systems. But computers that harness quantum bits, or qubits, promise to deliver exponential leaps in processing power that could break today's best encryption. The report cites an example of encryption that protects the process of swapping identical digital keys between two parties, who use them to decrypt secure messages sent to one another. A powerful quantum computer could crack RSA-1024, a popular algorithmic defense for this process, in less than a day. The U.S., Israel and others are working to develop standards for quantum-proof cryptographic algorithms, but they may not be ready or widely adopted by the time quantum computers arrive.
"[I]t will take at least a couple of decades to get quantum-safe cryptography broadly in place," the report says in closing. "If that holds, we're going have to hope it somehow takes even longer before a powerful quantum computer ends up in a malicious hacker's hands."
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You mean like every hostile or competing nation state?
... scary AI.
I swim in the quantum theory waters and it's goddam near impossible to rake the jiggle out of one qubit. The temperature has to be at near-absolute zero and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle plus all of the laws of thermodynamics and the properties of quantum vacuum are working against us.
As the qubit count increases, the randomness multiplies at an exponential rate. It's a nice dream, as is the theory of AI killing us all, but the hurdles are too great.
In the spirit of, "never say never," a practical quantum computer is at least 100 years away.
And here's the 411 on the encryption fear, anyway: A quantum computer that could instantly break today's encryption could just as quickly create encryption that is impossible to break.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
A few days ago one of the slashdot articles explained why quantum computers of a significant size will never be possible.
Which is right?
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I thought elliptical curve cryptography was good enough?
Also, it occurs to me they're concerned about a "20 year" timespan to get it widely deployed. Maybe a truly excellent algorithm just got patented, and they have to wait until it's unencumbered for it to spread?
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Don't forget hydrogen fuel cells! Remember those?
You should not ridicule hydrogen fuel cells. They turned out to not be the best solution, but when facing a critical need the best approach is a Flooding Algorithm, where you research every plausible solution. It is important to not only identify what works, but also what doesn't work. The cost of the research failures is negligible compared to the benefit of finding the best alternative transportation technology.
Funny story: All these systems have been broken so far. Turns out that the perfect theory does not translate to a perfect implementation.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
who cares, encryption will be broken by the time viable quantum computers are a reality anyway.
australia is just the first domino to fall, soon other nations will follow and all encryption must be breakable by law.
On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Uhh... going pretty strong. Prices have been gradually coming down and there is a lot of interest from industry. However, since batteries have also improved in the meantime, the focus is moving away from consumer applications (cars) to larger ones (ships, buses, trucks, trains, even regional planes), so they are not so visible to the man in the street.
I do work in hydrogen & fuel cells, and in the last 2-3 years we have seen a surge in industrial interest we can barely handle. We know that FC manufacturers are tooling for mass production, at which point prices will fall a lot faster. At this point we are where batteries were about 15 years ago, with some applications ready for deployment (buses, home CHP, trucks, trains) and plenty of others in advanced development—maritime is likely the next big thing.
So just because you don't hear about it in the 9 o'clock news it does not mean it has been abandoned. It has simply dipped down from the hype peak and started maturing.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
Research on quantum computing is now over 35 years old, and it has been systematically hyped all along, while having very little to show for itself. Existing quantum computers have yet to solve anything that can't be solved by traditional computers far more cheaply, an at least as efficiently, for all practical purposes. The horizon for quantum computers capable of tackling non-trivial problems was ten years away ten years ago, and it still remains ten years away today. Finally, it is not even clear yet that the engineering associated with keeping qubits appropriately entangled for solving problems of interest can be developed, just we don't know whether the engineering associated with warp drives is attainable. True, practical quantum computers may be developed within the next ten years - but the may also never be developed - we don't know yet. At this point, I'd bet that we'll get practical controlled nuclear fusion before we get practical quantum computing - i.e. quantum computing that solves serious, non-Mickey Mouse problems.