| ▲ | quotemstr 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
One attack weakens HAWK, a post-quantum cryptography cipher candidate. I don't trust these PQC things one bit. I'll use them in combination with a strong clasically-resistant cipher (in so-called hybrid encryption modes), but not alone. There's a push to turn off the classical modes and rely entirely on PQC for both quantum and classical security. Uh... no, thank you? Why would we want to do that at this point? The classical cipher component isn't hurting anything. Awfully creepy to pushing reliance on the new thing alone. ... especially now that we have LLM-discovered attacks on the new things. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | JuniperMesos 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
The classical cipher component is additonal complexity in the protocol and maybe some meaningful amount of additonal time to compute and key data to store/transmit, is it not? I can see why we'd like to avoid effectively encrypting the same data twice with different protocols, one of which is known to be vulnerable to quantum computer based attacks. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | some_furry 17 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
> One attack weakens HAWK, a post-quantum cryptography cipher candidate. I don't trust these PQC things one bit. I'll use them in combination with a strong clasically-resistant cipher (in so-called hybrid encryption modes), but not alone. HAWK is a signature algorithm, not encryption. | |||||||||||||||||||||||