boem@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 年前IBM releases first-ever 1,000-qubit quantum chipwww.nature.comexternal-linkmessage-square105fedilinkarrow-up1474arrow-down111
arrow-up1463arrow-down1external-linkIBM releases first-ever 1,000-qubit quantum chipwww.nature.comboem@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 年前message-square105fedilink
minus-square800XL@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up39arrow-down1·1 年前breaking encryption algorithms
minus-squareCorhen@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up31arrow-down1·1 年前From what i heard, even 1,000 qubits isn’t close to enough for modern passwords: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00017-0
minus-squareRin@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up27arrow-down1·1 年前Paywall. Also, passwords and RSA are two different things.
minus-squareferretlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15arrow-down1·1 年前Reversing hashing algos is what people mean when they talk about quantum computers cracking passwords / encryption, though.
minus-squarefrezik@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5arrow-down1·1 年前No, they mean breaking RSA. The industry standard methods of storing passwords are resistant to QC attacks. Passwords could be broken while being passed between client and server under existing algorithms, but not the databases they’re stored in.
breaking encryption algorithms
From what i heard, even 1,000 qubits isn’t close to enough for modern passwords: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00017-0
Paywall. Also, passwords and RSA are two different things.
Reversing hashing algos is what people mean when they talk about quantum computers cracking passwords / encryption, though.
No, they mean breaking RSA. The industry standard methods of storing passwords are resistant to QC attacks. Passwords could be broken while being passed between client and server under existing algorithms, but not the databases they’re stored in.