Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
Put topics in cronological order |
||
Line 1:
== Post-quantum cryptography ==▼
I have modified the entry about post-quantum cryptography. It was giving the impression that quantum cryptopgraphy could be broken by a quantum computer, which is of course not the case. The aim of post-quantum cryptography, in this usage of the term at least, is to find alternative _classical_ methods that are presumably secure against quantum computers. Quantum cryptography is obviously secure against adversaries with quantum computers, since those cannot violate the laws of quantum mechanics that are used to prove the security of QC.▼
[[User:Eric.cavalcanti|Eric.cavalcanti]] ([[User talk:Eric.cavalcanti|talk]]) 06:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)▼
== Position-based quantum cryptography ==
Hallo there,<br>
:I guess there is some confusion arising in using (or not using) the following terms:<br>
Line 22 ⟶ 17:
It doesn't say what the state of the technique is today; at least not in the introduction part, and the rest of the article is just about specific parts of the technology. Shouldn't there be anything about that in the article? Is it just on the research level or is it actually being used? --[[User:Kri|Kri]] ([[User talk:Kri|talk]]) 16:14, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
▲== Post-quantum cryptography ==
▲I have modified the entry about post-quantum cryptography. It was giving the impression that quantum cryptopgraphy could be broken by a quantum computer, which is of course not the case. The aim of post-quantum cryptography, in this usage of the term at least, is to find alternative _classical_ methods that are presumably secure against quantum computers. Quantum cryptography is obviously secure against adversaries with quantum computers, since those cannot violate the laws of quantum mechanics that are used to prove the security of QC.
▲[[User:Eric.cavalcanti|Eric.cavalcanti]] ([[User talk:Eric.cavalcanti|talk]]) 06:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
| |||