Keeping the Internet fast and secure: introducing Merkle Tree Certificates

Re:Keeping the Internet fast and secure: introducing Merkle ... by jchw on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @04:26AM (#45744147)

Even though I agree with you, I totally understand why the push for at least hybrid algorithms. We just don't know how quantum computers could feasibly scale. Until we know for sure that cracking existing crypto systems really is infeasible for physical reasons, using hybrid systems that provide an extra layer of security just seems like obvious good practice.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Keeping the Internet fast and secure: introducing Merkle ... by Avamander on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @04:41AM (#45744233)

At the same time it's very suspicious how a few three-letter agencies are pushing for total deprecation of non-PQ algorithms, even in hybrids.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Keeping the Internet fast and secure: introducing Merkle ... by goalieca on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @09:58AM (#45746923)

Transitions takes decades especially when silicon and networks are involved (eg secure boot and MTU). Most of us would rather just stick with a handful of ciphers than constantly changing (crypto agile has become crypto chaos).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Keeping the Internet fast and secure: introducing Merkle ... by hulitu on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @02:22PM (#45750966)

> We just don't know how quantum computers could feasibly scale.

We know. They are not able yet to emulate an i4004, let alone be a treat to "computing".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Keeping the Internet fast and secure: introducing Merkle ... by jchw on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @03:39PM (#45751989)

> We know.

We know that current quantum computers are very weak. We do not know what is physically possible, or even feasible. Quantum computers today struggle with decoherence, but we really genuinely don't know for sure if they always will or if there is a way to overcome it. We have not hit a point where we believe we are up against hard physical limitations that can never be overcome.

> They are not able yet to emulate an i4004, let alone be a treat [sic] to "computing".

I am skeptical this is a good benchmark, though. How many logical qubits do you reckon it would take to emulate an i4004? I don't have the answer, but I wouldn't be surprised if you need less to do something interesting that a classical computer can't reasonably.

[ Parent | on HN ]