[HN Gopher] Mysterious export controls on quantum computers
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Mysterious export controls on quantum computers
        
       Author : draazon
       Score  : 20 points
       Date   : 2024-07-05 18:06 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.newscientist.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.newscientist.com)
        
       | jzemeocala wrote:
       | Hmmm.... I wonder if someone has finally cracked RSA or its
       | friends.
       | 
       | I also remember a conspiracy theory that Bitcoin was actually
       | made as a litmus test to know if\when someone somewhere achieves
       | quantum supremacy (because then they would be able to crack the
       | block....or something like that
        
         | sandworm101 wrote:
         | The NSA and their ilk would not have waited for AES to be
         | broken. They would move to ban these things in response to
         | theoretical albeit confident assessment of the risk.
        
           | refulgentis wrote:
           | Hmm, that doesn't sound right to my ear.
           | 
           | They've loudly assumed it is possible.
           | 
           | c.f. Their focus has been on incentivizing private actors to
           | do post-quantum algorithms, yesterday.
           | 
           | c.f. most recently,
           | https://blog.chromium.org/2024/05/advancing-our-amazing-
           | bet-...
           | 
           | Do you have more info on why they'd ban import of it? Seems
           | like an obviously wrong strategy to combat it.
        
             | alwa wrote:
             | Aren't these export controls rather than import controls?
             | That is, if a company in their bloc does succeed at
             | developing cryptographically-relevant quantum computers,
             | they'd just as soon that company not sell that tech on to
             | the adversary?
             | 
             | As you said, they've loudly assumed it's possible--so
             | wouldn't it make sense for them to draw a line in the sand
             | now, _before_ the horse has bolted, to indicate where the
             | "now it's a national security matter" threshold lies?
        
         | Hizonner wrote:
         | I would put a fairly large wager on it just being bureaucratic
         | dumbassitosity, and give you odds.
        
         | davidgerard wrote:
         | there was some crazy around bitcoin and quantum, led by Vitalik
         | Buterin when he was young and foolish
         | https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/buterins-quantum-quest/
        
       | spacecadet wrote:
       | Whats mysterious? When I led a team working on some government
       | funded encryption stuff a few years ago, everyone in gov was
       | terrified of post-quantum cryptography. 10x a day I had to answer
       | questions about PQKD.
       | 
       | Maybe some very well funded quantum projects have made certain
       | implementations broken- but it never really mattered, because why
       | have PQKD when you have XKCD. lol
       | 
       | Id still employ social engineering, deepfakes, and violence over
       | the cost of building a machine.
       | 
       | By the way, we all know the Cloudflare lava lamps? I built a
       | laser diode/beam splitter random number generator at home, fun
       | toy.
        
         | Yoric wrote:
         | I've seen a recent paper that claims that they have
         | successfully executed one (single) instance of Grover's
         | algorithm using existing commercial quantum hardware, with lots
         | of hypotheses and lots of manual intervention.
         | 
         | We'll get there, but I don't think that anybody has
         | reasonably/reproducibly broken RSA using a quantum computer
         | just yet.
        
           | asdff wrote:
           | When you think of the significance of being able to break
           | encryption like this, it stands to reason that tech that
           | achieves these capabilities would be born secret.
        
             | Yoric wrote:
             | I'm not sure.
             | 
             | Quantum computing is based on a series of scientific
             | breakthroughs and still needs quite a few scientific and
             | technological breakthroughs in several domains before it
             | becomes viable for cryptography (in other fields, we're
             | much closer), in addition to lots of custom hardware.
             | 
             | It's extremely rare (and unpredictable) for a scientist to
             | achieve any kind of breakthrough entirely on their own.
             | They need to exchange ideas with other scientists from all
             | over the world. So you pretty much need your scientists are
             | to do their research largely in public - it _might_ be
             | possible to emulate this if you have a large enough number
             | of scientists on some kind of secret campus, but you'll
             | need to make sure that you're hiring top scientists _and_
             | you 're hurting their ability to both learn and teach the
             | future top scientists you're also going to need _and_ their
             | disappearance from the public track will attract lots of
             | attention.
             | 
             | Add to this the custom hardware, which will quite often
             | come from another country, and it's really hard to keep the
             | big things secret.
        
             | spacecadet wrote:
             | Secrets are near impossible to keep beyond 1 person.
        
       | fsh wrote:
       | There's no mystery here. One country came up with some arbitrary
       | criteria, and the other countries copied them.
        
         | HillRat wrote:
         | Yeah, I suspect. As the article notes, it might be related to
         | quantum simulation limits (e.g., QISKIT can't IIRC simulate
         | more than 32 qubits), or taken from the literature on using
         | Grover's alg to attack S-AES, but it feels pretty arbitrary to
         | me (though I haven't been current on quantum computing for
         | several years now).
        
       | gnabgib wrote:
       | Discussions
       | 
       | (15 points, 2 days ago, 6 comments)
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40865218
       | 
       | (20 points, 17 hours ago, 8 comments)
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40879417
        
       | Yoric wrote:
       | Could be related to the Russian announcement, a few weeks ago,
       | that they have built a 30 qubit computer (which may or may not be
       | reasonably true - in the field, everybody has a different
       | definition of "qubit", "computer" and even "have").
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-05 23:01 UTC)