How does IBM's 53-bit quantum computer compare to classical ones for cryptanalytic tasks?After Google's breakthrough: When will quantum computers break today's encryption?What telltale signs would indicate that quantum computers are about to become dangerous to classical cryptography?Is this paper's technique for factoring RSA 2048 with noisy qubits realistic?
80’s or earlier short fantasy about very “sweet” neighbours
Which Grows Faster: Factorial or Double Exponentiation
In academic writing why do some recommend to avoid "announcing" the topic?
Is an afterburner louder than the same jet engine without it?
“You are not paid to think, but to do X” is always wrong in the workplace?
How to create a new file via touch if it is in a directory which doesn't exist?
What is the rationale for single engine military aircraft?
Feeling burned-out in PhD. program and thinking about dropping out
How many Dominion sets are there?
How did the USSR track Gagarin's Vostok-1 orbital flight? Was tracking capability an issue in the choice of orbit?
My passport's Machine Readable Zone is damaged. How do I deal with it?
Will a falling rod stay in contact with the frictionless floor?
How can I justify this without determining the determinant?
Explanation of output produced by the following quantum circuit
Sudo directive in /etc/sudoers.d doesn't work (but it's fine if it's in /etc/sudoers)
If you're loaning yourself a mortgage, why must you pay interest? At the bank's posted rate?
Idiom for "Ahead of its time"
Why should interrupts be short in well configured system?
Not Quite a Pipe Dream
Journal editor made bad edits to my (accepted) paper - how do I respond?
Bitcoin protocol and Wireshark
Why is a living creature being frozen in carbonite in “The Mandalorian” so common when it seemed so risky in “The Empire Strikes Back?”
Baby's head always turned to one side: should I do anything?
Chess PhD topic in machine learning?
How does IBM's 53-bit quantum computer compare to classical ones for cryptanalytic tasks?
After Google's breakthrough: When will quantum computers break today's encryption?What telltale signs would indicate that quantum computers are about to become dangerous to classical cryptography?Is this paper's technique for factoring RSA 2048 with noisy qubits realistic?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
$begingroup$
IBM just announced "a new 53-qubit quantum computer".
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks? E.g. finding a 48- or 64-bit value whose SHA-256 has a certain value (edit: or factoring the product of two distinct primes, or computing some discrete logarithm).
quantum-cryptanalysis quantum-computing
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
IBM just announced "a new 53-qubit quantum computer".
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks? E.g. finding a 48- or 64-bit value whose SHA-256 has a certain value (edit: or factoring the product of two distinct primes, or computing some discrete logarithm).
quantum-cryptanalysis quantum-computing
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
IBM just announced "a new 53-qubit quantum computer".
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks? E.g. finding a 48- or 64-bit value whose SHA-256 has a certain value (edit: or factoring the product of two distinct primes, or computing some discrete logarithm).
quantum-cryptanalysis quantum-computing
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
$endgroup$
IBM just announced "a new 53-qubit quantum computer".
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks? E.g. finding a 48- or 64-bit value whose SHA-256 has a certain value (edit: or factoring the product of two distinct primes, or computing some discrete logarithm).
quantum-cryptanalysis quantum-computing
quantum-cryptanalysis quantum-computing
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
edited Sep 19 at 14:32
psmears
1253 bronze badges
1253 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
asked Sep 18 at 19:36
fgrieufgrieu
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
93k7 gold badges194 silver badges388 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks?
Not at all - IBM's quantum computer cannot perform any nontrivial cryptanalytic task.
For one, 53 physical qubits far too few to do anything interesting; for example, implementing SHA-256 would take thousands of logical qubits.
For another, the qubits are not even close to be reliable enough. The IBM quantum computer cannot do any quantum error correction - this means that, as it performs operations on the qubits, the errors pile up. Any interesting cryptanalytic task requires us to perform millions (or more) of quantum operations; even a slight amount of error accumulation would overwhelm any result.
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Sep 20 at 18:04
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "281"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f74395%2fhow-does-ibms-53-bit-quantum-computer-compare-to-classical-ones-for-cryptanalyt%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks?
Not at all - IBM's quantum computer cannot perform any nontrivial cryptanalytic task.
For one, 53 physical qubits far too few to do anything interesting; for example, implementing SHA-256 would take thousands of logical qubits.
For another, the qubits are not even close to be reliable enough. The IBM quantum computer cannot do any quantum error correction - this means that, as it performs operations on the qubits, the errors pile up. Any interesting cryptanalytic task requires us to perform millions (or more) of quantum operations; even a slight amount of error accumulation would overwhelm any result.
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Sep 20 at 18:04
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks?
Not at all - IBM's quantum computer cannot perform any nontrivial cryptanalytic task.
For one, 53 physical qubits far too few to do anything interesting; for example, implementing SHA-256 would take thousands of logical qubits.
For another, the qubits are not even close to be reliable enough. The IBM quantum computer cannot do any quantum error correction - this means that, as it performs operations on the qubits, the errors pile up. Any interesting cryptanalytic task requires us to perform millions (or more) of quantum operations; even a slight amount of error accumulation would overwhelm any result.
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Sep 20 at 18:04
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks?
Not at all - IBM's quantum computer cannot perform any nontrivial cryptanalytic task.
For one, 53 physical qubits far too few to do anything interesting; for example, implementing SHA-256 would take thousands of logical qubits.
For another, the qubits are not even close to be reliable enough. The IBM quantum computer cannot do any quantum error correction - this means that, as it performs operations on the qubits, the errors pile up. Any interesting cryptanalytic task requires us to perform millions (or more) of quantum operations; even a slight amount of error accumulation would overwhelm any result.
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
$endgroup$
How does it compare to classical computers, performance-wise, for cryptanalytic tasks?
Not at all - IBM's quantum computer cannot perform any nontrivial cryptanalytic task.
For one, 53 physical qubits far too few to do anything interesting; for example, implementing SHA-256 would take thousands of logical qubits.
For another, the qubits are not even close to be reliable enough. The IBM quantum computer cannot do any quantum error correction - this means that, as it performs operations on the qubits, the errors pile up. Any interesting cryptanalytic task requires us to perform millions (or more) of quantum operations; even a slight amount of error accumulation would overwhelm any result.
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
answered Sep 18 at 19:53
ponchoponcho
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
101k3 gold badges165 silver badges268 bronze badges
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Sep 20 at 18:04
add a comment
|
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Sep 20 at 18:04
1
1
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Sep 20 at 18:04
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– Ella Rose♦
Sep 20 at 18:04
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Cryptography Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcrypto.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f74395%2fhow-does-ibms-53-bit-quantum-computer-compare-to-classical-ones-for-cryptanalyt%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
