[flagged]
"can we trust this is the best encryption standard" is by definition "no". Doesn't matter who you are asking about what.
NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
31–40 of 126 posts
Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#32[flagged]
Claiming loyalty is a litmus test for layoffs is a bit incendiary and a needless introduction of a strongly biased view of politics into the conversation. No doubt for leadership levels an active disinterest in helping enable open inquiry into the state of things would be fireable, but calling this a loyalty test is a strong spin. One that’s been normalized lately to be sure, but there’s no need to further it.
I’d be more concerned with whether NIST colludes with the NSA to approve algorithms they could crack.
Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#33[flagged]
Not to defend the practice, but the layoffs have been for employees with 0-3 years in role, which probably does not include the people selecting post-quantum encryption algorithms.
The 0 to 3 year counter also resets when you get promoted (you are "probationary" for the new role)
Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you trust them before?
I trusted them to at least pick an encryption that only they could break...rather than one that other nation states may be able to crack as well.
Heh. That's fair.
I wonder what other countries do? Do their agencies trust NIST or they recommend their own and run their programs for algorithms. I am thinking of say Germany, France, Britain etc.
Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you trust them before?
I trusted them to at least pick an encryption that only they could break...rather than one that other nation states may be able to crack as well.
If it's breakable by them, it's breakable by anyone. Full stop. It is not possible to create an encryption scheme only breakable by NIST (or NSA, or whatever 3-4 letter agency).
Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#36What is your favorite post-quantum encryption approach?
I think Lattice-based ones will eventually be broken by a quantum algorithm. I am fully on board with lamport signatures and SPHINCS+
Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I trusted them to at least pick an encryption that only they could break...rather than one that other nation states may be able to crack as well.
Heh. That's fair. I wonder what other countries do? Do their agencies trust NIST or they recommend their own and run their programs for algorithms. I am thinking of say Germany, France, Britain etc.
They have their own agencies responsible, but take note of what NIST says (especially the UK).
https://www.bsi.bund.de/EN/Themen/Unternehmen-und-Organisati...
https://cyber.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/document/pqc-trans...
https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/whitepaper/next-steps-preparing-for-...
Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#38Re: NIST selects HQC as fifth algorithm for post-quantum encryption
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I Wonder why ? It doesn't to me. Maybe I'm just bad at recognizing LLMs patterns
the question/conclusion phrasing at the end is a suspicious red flag to me, quick click on their comment history is confirmation
The pattern of a top level comment on each post and no replies gives it away for me. Surprised to see a bot here.