Submission + - Why Quantum Cryptanalysis is Bollocks 1
An anonymous reader writes: Quantum code breaking? You'd get further with an 8-bit computer, an abacus, and a dog
The US National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) has been pushing for the development of post-quantum cryptographic algorithms since 2016.
"If large-scale quantum computers are ever built, they will be able to break many of the public-key cryptosystems currently in use," NIST explains in its summary of Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC).
Peter Gutmann, a professor of computer science at the University of Auckland New Zealand, thinks PQC is bollocks – "nonsense" for our American readers – and said as much in a 2024 presentation [PDF], "Why Quantum Cryptanalysis is Bollocks."
The US National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) has been pushing for the development of post-quantum cryptographic algorithms since 2016.
"If large-scale quantum computers are ever built, they will be able to break many of the public-key cryptosystems currently in use," NIST explains in its summary of Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC).
Peter Gutmann, a professor of computer science at the University of Auckland New Zealand, thinks PQC is bollocks – "nonsense" for our American readers – and said as much in a 2024 presentation [PDF], "Why Quantum Cryptanalysis is Bollocks."
Selective values, pre-computation, and more lies (Score:2)
Using the answer to generate a compiled Shor's Algorithm for 15 and 21 with a classical computer, failing for 35.
Picking numbers with lots of 0s in binary to get large values that are easy to factor.
Picking 2 numbers that are within 2-3 bits difference, using a square root and iterating to get the factors.
None of these are valid cases for quantum factorization. The entire fact that no quantum factorization has ever been successful, yet the news is full of these trick success stories.
There needs to be a clo