[11102] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Quantum Computing Puts Encrypted Messages at Risk
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ian Hill)
Fri Jul 12 15:01:00 2002
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 17:21:18 +0100
From: Ian Hill <Ian@Protonic.com>
To: cryptography@wasabisystems.com
Reply-To: Ian@Protonic.com
In-Reply-To: <20020711195029.A2690@Katmai.IanHill.org.uk>
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 07:50:30PM +0100, Ian Hill wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 04:20:37PM -0400, R. A. Hettinga wrote:
> > Given that quantum computers will provide an enormous power boost,
> > encryption experts believe that current standards for encryption,
> > which are based on computational difficulty, will then fall. In the
> > world of quantum computing and encryption, the question of which will
> > come first, quantum computing or quantum encryption, is very
> > important.
> > In fact, it is vital.
> >
> > [...]
>
> I don't know enough about quantum computation to comment on this first
> section. There are numerous comments that seem wrong to my
> understanding, but I shan't make a fuss.
>
> [Blah Blah Blah]
>
> --
> Ian Hill
> Ian@Protonic.com
>
> Unprovided with original learning, unformed in the habits of thinking,
> unskilled in the arts of composition, I resolved to write a book.
> -- Edward Gibbon
>
It has been politely pointed out to me that I overstepped my intentions
with this post. Perhaps you will allow me to clarify myself before the
flames begin :-)
>From my reply to Matthew Byng-Maddick:
I can't honestly say I follow the theory to its roots, but from what I
do understand, QKD is 100% secure now (if it is implemented correctly).
Provided that our current thoughts on Quantum Mechanics remain accurate,
then I appreciate this system will be secure.
I appreciate also that this is not like standard cryptanalysis, where
you can just take a copy of the ciphertext and keep bashing at it with a
range of techniques. In this respect this is a whole different scenario
to cracking more standard crypto systems. The point I was attempted to
make, but evidently overstepped slightly whilst writing up, was that I
find it grossly arrogant to say this is it, we have QKD, we can all go
home. One day I am sure someone will come up with a counter-theory
[which allows us to detect polarisation without altering it] which
doesnt fall on its face. Such is the nature of physics.
[ END QUOTE ]
--
Ian Hill
Ian@Protonic.com
The absent ones are always at fault.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo@wasabisystems.com
