[HN Gopher] Quantum Algorithms for Lattice Problems - Update on ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Quantum Algorithms for Lattice Problems - Update on April 18
        
       Author : tux3
       Score  : 119 points
       Date   : 2024-04-19 10:58 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.chenyilei.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.chenyilei.net)
        
       | runiq wrote:
       | I hope the author will post an official correction/amendment to
       | the original paper and not just leave a short notice on their
       | personal homepage.
        
         | mellosouls wrote:
         | Did you check the paper they describe in the note?
         | 
         | "See the updated version of eprint/2024/555 - Section 3.5.9
         | (Page 37) for details"
        
           | runiq wrote:
           | No, I did not. Shame on me, and thanks for the heads up!
        
         | boole1854 wrote:
         | He has done this, page 37: https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/555.pdf
        
           | runiq wrote:
           | I totally missed that, shame on me. Thanks for the
           | correction!
        
       | mellosouls wrote:
       | Context, eg:
       | 
       | Quantum Algorithms for Lattice Problems,123 comments
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39998396
       | 
       | and
       | 
       | A quick post on Chen's algorithm, 95 comments
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40056640
        
       | kleiba wrote:
       | I find that this is a great reaction to someone finding a bug in
       | your paper. No trying to cover it up, but straight-up admitting a
       | mistake. Also, the fact that he leaves the paper out because it
       | _does_ contain novel ideas that might be useful for further
       | research is cool.
        
         | baby wrote:
         | I had a similar thing happened to a paper of mine at the start
         | of my career. Someone found an issue and published a paper to
         | attack my paper. I felt like shit for a long time and thought
         | about retracting. But then decided that my paper actually
         | contained a lot of cool stuff, and so published an update with
         | text highlighted in ted throughout the paper talking about the
         | attack and about the sections that became obsolete.
         | 
         | In retrospect I'm really happy I did the right thing. It can be
         | nerve wracking to publish something that ends up being wrong,
         | but being transparent and not taking things personally, and
         | understanding that whatever happened is still providing value
         | to a lot of people, is the right path.
        
       | mchusma wrote:
       | I love this, great work for science overall. This is exactly the
       | type of approach/response one should take, and I hope he gets
       | praise for doing the right thing.
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | I find it amazing someone can even read and follow all the
       | formulas and find a bug
        
         | hyperbovine wrote:
         | They have spent thousands, if not tens of thousands, of hours
         | building this skill set. It's like saying "I find it amazing
         | that someone can play Scriabin's piano sonata no. 5 perfectly".
        
         | ncclporterror wrote:
         | The CV of Thomas Vidick, one of the two people that found the
         | bug, is quite impressive. Undergrad at ENS in France (ranked
         | 1st), PhD at Berkeley (3.97/4.0), postdoc at MIT under Scott
         | Aaronson, and now full professor at Caltech. He literally wrote
         | a book on the topic (Introduction to Quantum Cryptography). So,
         | yeah.
        
       | 3PS wrote:
       | Condolences to the author, but this is a huge relief. A polytime
       | quantum algorithm for LWE would have been a scary prospect for
       | the future of asymmetric key crypto. (Not to mention all the
       | other cool stuff people are building on top like fully
       | homomorphic encryption.) Even if it wasn't quite fast enough to
       | break the current schemes that NIST is standardizing, I (and I'm
       | sure many others) would much prefer those problems to stay in
       | exptime.
        
       | oersted wrote:
       | His "comic slides" are fun :)
       | 
       | https://eurocrypt.iacr.org/2017/slides/A04-constraint-hiding...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-04-19 23:00 UTC)