[Crypto-chi] Looks like our cryptoparties may be all for naught

[Freddy Martinez]

What Jen said.

FM
On Nov 18, 2014 1:39 PM, "jen" <jen at redshiftzero.com> wrote:

> As Eviljoel says, the prototype quantum computers that we know currently
> exist can only factor small integers - classical computers are right now
> still your best bet at factoring big numbers. For example, current
> quantum computers can factor ~8-bit numbers, but classical computers can
> factor 768-bit numbers (in a year [0]). So unless one is using an RSA
> modulus of 15, one is probably pretty alright versus quantum computers
> (though not against classical computers... or human children and their
> pesky arithmetic skills). Of course, this is all based on public
> information. It is possible that some agency with an $11B budget for
> cracking crypto might have a greater capability, though I doubt even
> they can do much more with respect to quantum computation.
>
> With that said, a lot of interesting academic work is going on to make
> cryptosystems that are strong against adversaries with both classic and
> quantum computers. Many ideas like lattice-based cryptography that your
> article mentions toward the end have been around for a long time but are
> getting renewed interest because of this threat. One of the main
> problems right now for at least lattice-based crypto is that it's slow
> and thus impractical. And even when we do have cryptosystems that are
> both practical and quantum-resistant, it's a long and frustrating path
> to having such a system be deployed everywhere, as we've seen when
> trying to migrate away from weak ciphers like RC4 [1].
>
> If anyone is particularly interested in this topic, I recommend checking
> out a nice book that Dan Bernstein and others have written on various
> future PK cryptosystems (including lattices) [2].
>
> Best,
>
> Jen
>
> [0] https://eprint.iacr.org/2010/006.pdf
> [1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/killing-rc4-the-long-goodbye/
> [2] https://www.springer.com/mathematics/numbers/book/978-3-540-88701-0
>
> eviljoel wrote:
> > Hey Joe,
> >
> > It is generally believed that a quantum computer that can do non-trivial
> > computation is still at least several years away (if not 10s or 100s of
> > years away).  When that happens, I am sure we'll move to quantum
> > cryptography.
> >
> > Joel Luellwitz
> >
> >
> > On 11/17/2014 11:48 PM, joe fuentes wrote:
> >> I came across this and wanted to share with you.
> >>
> >> It sez quantum computing will make mince pie meat out of crypto.
> >>
> >> Wot are your thoughts on this? Post please.
> >>
> >> /Wot do I think?/ *The end is nigh!*
> >>
> >> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/quantum-computers-end-cryptography/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cryptoparty-chi mailing list
> >> cryptoparty-chi at groups.sshchicago.org
> >> http://groups.sshchicago.org/listinfo/cryptoparty-chi
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cryptoparty-chi mailing list
> > cryptoparty-chi at groups.sshchicago.org
> > http://groups.sshchicago.org/listinfo/cryptoparty-chi
> >
>
> --
> ***************
> Jen
> @redshiftzero
> PGP 0x90CC0310
> @CryptopartyChi
> ***************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cryptoparty-chi mailing list
> cryptoparty-chi at groups.sshchicago.org
> http://groups.sshchicago.org/listinfo/cryptoparty-chi
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://groups.sshchicago.org/pipermail/cryptoparty-chi/attachments/20141118/66123491/attachment.html>