91–100 of 281 posts
As with any quantum computing news, I will wait for Scott Aaronson to tell me what to think about this.
This paper on verifiable advantage is a lot more compelling. With Scott Aaronson and Quantinuum among other great researchers
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The big threat is passively breaking TLS, so it’s browser traffic. Or, any internet traffic?
Okay, but breaking that TLS (device->bank) would allow you to intercept the session keys and then decrypt the conversation. Alright, so now you can read I logged in and booked a transaction to my landlord or whatever. What else can you do? OTP/2FA code prevents you from re-using my credentials. Has it been demonstrated at all that someone who intercepts a session key is able to somehow inject into a conversation? It…
if you can read the TLS session in general, you can capture the TLS session ticket and then use that to make a subsequent connection. This is easier as you dont have to be injecting packets live or make inconvinent packets disappear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why wait? Just go read the paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09526-6 In the last sentence of the abstract you will find: "These results ... indicate a viable path to practical quantum advantage." And in the conclusions: "Although the random circuits used in the dynamic learning demonstration remain a toy model for Hamiltonians that are of practical relevance, the scheme is readily applicable to real p…
> "These results ... indicate a viable path to practical quantum advantage" I'll add this to my list of useful phrases. Q: Hey AndrewStephens, you promised that task would be completed two days ago. Can you finish it today? A: Results indicate a viable path to success.
The MBA wakes up, sees the fire, sees a fire extinguisher in the corner of the room, empties the fire extinguisher to put out the fire, then goes back to sleep.
The engineer wakes up, sees the fire, sees the fire extinguisher, estimates the extent of the fire, determines the exact amount of foam required to put it out including a reasonable tolerance, and dispenses exactly that amount to put out the fire, and then satisified that there is enough left in case of another fire, goes back to sleep.
The quantum computing physicist wakes up, sees the fire, observes the fire extinguisher, determines that there is a viable path to practical fire extinguishment, and goes back to sleep.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SO... BTC goes to zero?
I don’t see why bitcoin wouldn’t update its software in such a case. The majority of minors just need to agree. But why wouldn’t they if the alternative is going to zero?
That's an uncomfortably apt typo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t see why bitcoin wouldn’t update its software in such a case. The majority of minors just need to agree. But why wouldn’t they if the alternative is going to zero?
Sir Alexander Dane: MINERS, not MINORS.
We're all asking it: any impact on AES?
The rule of thumb is that a working quantum computer that can run Grover's algorithm reduces the security of a symmetric cipher to half of its key size. That is, AES-128 should be considered to have a 64 bit key size, which is why it's not considered "quantum-safe." Edit: An effective key space of 2^64 is not secure according to modern-day standards. It was secure at the times of DES.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
no, not really, PQC is already being discussed in pretty much every relevant crypto thing for couple years alearady and there are multiple PQC algos ready to protect important data in banking etc as well
I don’t really understand the threat to banking. Let’s say you crack the encryption key used in my bank between a java payment processing system and a database server. You can’t just inject transactions or something. Is the threat that internal network traffic could be read? Transactions all go to clearing houses anyway. Is it to protect browser->webapp style banking? those all use ec by now anyway, and even if they…
> Quantum verifiability means the result can be repeated on our quantum computer — or any other of the same caliber — to get the same answer, confirming the result.