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

[brittany]

You are a badass.

:)
On 11/18/14 1:38 PM, jen 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
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141118/23be2b47/attachment.html>