4 ms·
If the answer was "the NSA is operating quantum cryptanalysis in production and ECDH should be considered completely broken", then anyone who knew this and told
by amenhotep 3y ago
If the answer was "the NSA is operating quantum cryptanalysis in production and ECDH should be considered completely broken", then anyone who knew this and told you would be in enormous trouble.
It seems unlikely that that's the case, but still, the question is sort of unanswerable. For now it's not known to be a threat, but how much paranoia you have over its potential is subjective.
- cryptonector 3y agoThe paranoid answer is to assume that certain organizations (e.g., nation state intelligence services, corporations that have enormous capital available, extremely wealthy people who can create organizations to pursue this) already have quantum cryptanalysis capabilities or very soon will. In any case, it does no harm to be ready for a PQ world.
- sesm 3y agoOne can be paranoid in a completely different direction, like “any quantum computer can’t survive long enough to perform any useful computation because objective collapse theories are right, the whole post-quantum cryptography exists to push implementations with backdoors injected by government”.
- __MatrixMan__ 3y agoI have this type of tinfoil hat. I put it on whenever I see people blindly merging security fixes in response to vulnerability scans.
- KMag 3y agoWe're likely to see hybrid PQ + ECDH key exchange for the foreseeable future, running the pair of exchanged values through a hash-based key derivation function. Partially due to fears of backdoors, but also out of caution because the mathematics of PQ cryptography has seen much less attention than DH / ECDH / RSA cryptography. For a long time, there was similar conservative skepticism regarding ECDH.