On Sat, Aug 06, 2022 at 04:00:59AM -0700, Rob Sayre wrote: > On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 10:15 PM Benjamin Kaduk <bka...@akamai.com> wrote: > > > > > It's annoying to the attacker when they have to use their expensive and > > finicky > > hardware once (or multiple times) for each individual message/exchange they > > want to break, > > > > Well, I can agree with the term "expensive", but I'm not sure what you mean > by "finicky". Are you saying they only work sometimes? It seems a bit > hand-wavy to say that.
(Note: my Ph.D. is in theoretical (quantum) chemistry.) Quantum mechanics is inherently a matter of probabilities and potential outcomes. Current hardware relies on either being very cold, very isolated from the surroundings, or both, to avoid unwanted coupling between qbits and the outside world that causes decoherence. Achieving the physics in a physical engineering matter is inherently finicky, though you can build error-correction and robustness on top of it that helps. > I've seen quantum computers before. They are room-sized, but not that big. > I still find the term "quantum annoying" rather imprecise. It's playing at the margins between theory and engineering practicality, so the target is going to change over time. I'm not surprised that this comes across as having some level of imprecision. -Ben _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
