Default avatar
SchwurBler 11 months ago
What nobody seems to bring up is the complete lack of a proof of concept attack on something easier to Crack. An 8bit DSA analogon cracked by a 48 logical Qbits machine could be a useful canary. PoW! All the QC arguments I have heard over the years are fear based with minimal backup, because spooky quantum.

Replies (3)

Judge Hardcase's avatar
Judge Hardcase 11 months ago
Judge Hardcase's avatar Judge Hardcase
I'm not technical enough to know, but I thought, in theory, 'they' already know how to break 128-bit or 256-bit or whatever encryption if they just had enough qubits. So, to me, when the claim revolves around a certain number of qubits - like 100 or whatever, shouldn't they already be able to demonstrate supremacy in the realm say 8-bit? or even 16-bit encryption? (or maybe they do already claim this supremacy? I don't know; but would like to know). Maybe I'm wrong; but, all the hype around inevitably being able to break encryption once they are able to build enough qubits seems to be ignoring the important fact that what they are calling a 'qubit' isn't even in itself what they would eventually need - never mind how many of these proto-qubits they manage to be able string together.
View quoted note →
Default avatar
SchwurBler 11 months ago
My main point: We need a canary - an intentionally weak, 8-bit ECDSA - something that small (available) quantum computers can actually crack. Otherwise, quantum cryptographers will keep feeding us suckers the FUD we deserve. Give them a real target or shut them down. I've seen this grift from the inside for years.