@[email protected] to Privacy [email protected]English • 2 years agoTutanota announces PQDrive project to develop a post-quantum encrypted cloud storage solutionalternativeto.netexternal-linkmessage-square17fedilinkarrow-up178arrow-down10cross-posted to: encryption
arrow-up178arrow-down1external-linkTutanota announces PQDrive project to develop a post-quantum encrypted cloud storage solutionalternativeto.net@[email protected] to Privacy [email protected]English • 2 years agomessage-square17fedilinkcross-posted to: encryption
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish8•edit-22 years agoAren’t the encryption algorithms used today quantum resistant anyways? I’m all for stronger privacy and security, but this just seems like a gimmick.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish6•2 years agoI read somewhere its only currently hard due to the number of qbits. Once they get over a certain number (I forget what) they will be breakable
minus-square@QuazarOmegalinkEnglish3•2 years agoI think so, also wasn’t quantum computing a real threat for asymmetrical encryption only? Some info over here
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish4•edit-22 years agoYeah, and since symettric encryption is usually used for file encryption and stuff like that, I honestly don’t see the point in this.
minus-square@QuazarOmegalinkEnglish1•2 years agoExactly, well if anything, I guess the claim is technically correct, which in this case may not be the best kind of correct
Aren’t the encryption algorithms used today quantum resistant anyways?
I’m all for stronger privacy and security, but this just seems like a gimmick.
I read somewhere its only currently hard due to the number of qbits. Once they get over a certain number (I forget what) they will be breakable
I think so, also wasn’t quantum computing a real threat for asymmetrical encryption only?
Some info over here
Yeah, and since symettric encryption is usually used for file encryption and stuff like that, I honestly don’t see the point in this.
Exactly, well if anything, I guess the claim is technically correct, which in this case may not be the best kind of correct