pith. sign in

arxiv: 2404.10659 · v1 · submitted 2024-04-16 · 💻 cs.CR

Cybersecurity in the Quantum Era: Assessing the Impact of Quantum Computing on Infrastructure

Yaser Baseri , Vikas Chouhan , Ali Ghorbani This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 02:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CR
keywords quantum computingcybersecuritycritical infrastructurecloud securityquantum-resistant cryptographysecurity blueprintvulnerability assessmentpost-quantum threats
0
0 comments X

The pith

Quantum computing threatens current encryption across nine layers of critical infrastructure and cloud services, requiring a nine-component security blueprint for protection.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines how quantum computers could break the encryption securing critical infrastructure and cloud environments. It evaluates vulnerabilities across nine layers from applications and data through to networks. To address this, the work presents a tailored nine-component blueprint that strengthens defenses in each area against quantum threats. The assessment provides stakeholders with a risk framework to guide design, implementation, and policy toward quantum-resistant cryptography. This preparation is presented as essential to maintain data security as quantum technology advances.

Core claim

The emergence of quantum computing threatens to crack current encryption methods that protect critical infrastructure and cloud services. Evaluating vulnerabilities across nine layers including applications, data, runtime, middleware, operating systems, virtualization, hardware, storage, and networks leads to the proposal of a tailored security blueprint encompassing nine critical infrastructure components. This blueprint strengthens each area's defenses against quantum-induced cyber threats through proactive strategies and quantum-resistant cryptography, equipping stakeholders to make informed decisions on design, implementation, and policy.

What carries the argument

The tailored security blueprint encompassing nine critical infrastructure components that addresses vulnerabilities across applications, data, runtime, middleware, operating systems, virtualization, hardware, storage, and networks.

If this is right

  • Stakeholders gain knowledge to make informed decisions about design, implementation, and policy formulation.
  • Collaboration between sectors will develop and implement quantum-resistant cryptography.
  • Each of the nine areas gains strengthened defenses against potential quantum-induced cyber threats.
  • Resilience of critical infrastructure increases through the strategic vulnerability and risk assessment.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The blueprint could be tested in actual cloud deployments to measure its performance against simulated quantum attacks.
  • Integration with emerging post-quantum standards might require adjustments to the nine components.
  • Regulators could reference the layered assessment when setting requirements for infrastructure operators.
  • Similar vulnerability mapping might apply to other technologies that could disrupt encryption in the future.

Load-bearing premise

Implementing the nine-component blueprint will strengthen defenses against quantum threats even without any described validation, testing, or comparison to existing frameworks.

What would settle it

A controlled simulation applying the blueprint to one layer such as network encryption and testing whether it resists a quantum algorithm attack better than current methods, or fails to do so.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2404.10659 by Ali Ghorbani, Vikas Chouhan, Yaser Baseri.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Infrastructure Stack Components are not quantum-safe, leading to severe consequences like data breaches, identity theft, and unauthorized access. The implications are particularly critical for cloud services, handled by industry giants like Amazon, Google, and Microsoft, where the security of massive volumes of sensitive data is at stake. Despite the uncertainty surrounding the timeline of practical quantu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: NIST Cryptographic Standards see an overview of selected cryptographic standards provided by NIST [45]–[51]. With the impending arrival of quantum computers with significant capabilities, their impact on both public and symmetric cryptographic systems is unavoidable. Even the new quantum-safe cryptographic methods being considered for standardization by NIST are not entirely im￾mune to vulnerabilities. In … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Cumulative Expert Opinions Related to Quantum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Expected Impact of Quantum Threat for Classic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative Risk Assessment based on Likelihood and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Taxonomy of Attacks for Quantum-Safe Cryptographic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The emergence of quantum computing presents a double-edged sword for cybersecurity. While its immense power holds promise for advancements in various fields, it also threatens to crack the foundation of current encryption methods. This analysis explores the impact of quantum computing on critical infrastructure and cloud services, meticulously evaluating potential vulnerabilities across various layers, including applications, data, runtime, middleware, operating systems, virtualization, hardware, storage, and networks. We advocate for proactive security strategies and collaboration between sectors to develop and implement quantum-resistant cryptography. This crucial shift necessitates a comprehensive approach, and the paper introduces a tailored security blueprint encompassing nine critical infrastructure components. This blueprint strengthens each area's defenses against potential quantum-induced cyber threats. Our strategic vulnerability and risk assessment equips stakeholders with the knowledge to navigate the complex quantum threat landscape. This empowers them to make informed decisions about design, implementation, and policy formulation, ultimately bolstering the resilience of critical infrastructure. In essence, this analysis not only forecasts quantum threats but also offers a sophisticated, actionable framework for fortifying infrastructure and cloud environments against the multifaceted challenges of the quantum era. This proactive approach will ensure continued data security and a thriving digital landscape in the years to come

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper assesses the impact of quantum computing on critical infrastructure and cloud services by evaluating vulnerabilities across nine layers (applications, data, runtime, middleware, operating systems, virtualization, hardware, storage, and networks). It advocates proactive adoption of quantum-resistant cryptography and introduces a tailored nine-component security blueprint intended to strengthen defenses against quantum threats, providing stakeholders with a strategic vulnerability and risk assessment for design, implementation, and policy decisions.

Significance. If the blueprint were accompanied by validation or quantitative grounding, the work could serve as a useful high-level synthesis for practitioners transitioning infrastructure to post-quantum security. As presented, however, the contribution is limited to narrative description without new data, derivations, simulations, or comparisons to established frameworks such as NIST PQC guidelines, reducing its significance to that of an introductory survey.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / blueprint introduction] Abstract and the section introducing the nine-component blueprint: the central claim that this blueprint 'strengthens each area's defenses' and constitutes an 'actionable framework' is unsupported by any validation, metrics, simulation of Shor/Grover attacks on the layers, risk-reduction quantification, or comparison against existing post-quantum migration standards (NIST, ETSI). This is load-bearing for the paper's assertion of providing an actionable framework.
  2. [Vulnerability and risk assessment sections] The vulnerability assessment across the nine layers supplies only qualitative descriptions without error analysis, falsifiable predictions, or worked examples showing how any single component mitigates a concrete quantum attack vector.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and title use 'meticulously evaluating' and 'sophisticated, actionable framework,' but the manuscript contains no quantitative evaluation or comparative analysis; these phrases should be toned to match the actual scope.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. The comments correctly identify that the manuscript is a high-level qualitative synthesis rather than an empirically validated study. We respond to each major comment below and indicate planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / blueprint introduction] Abstract and the section introducing the nine-component blueprint: the central claim that this blueprint 'strengthens each area's defenses' and constitutes an 'actionable framework' is unsupported by any validation, metrics, simulation of Shor/Grover attacks on the layers, risk-reduction quantification, or comparison against existing post-quantum migration standards (NIST, ETSI). This is load-bearing for the paper's assertion of providing an actionable framework.

    Authors: We agree the manuscript contains no new simulations, quantitative risk reductions, or side-by-side comparisons with NIST PQC guidelines. The contribution is a conceptual nine-component blueprint derived from layer-wise threat analysis. We will revise the abstract and introduction to replace 'actionable framework' and 'strengthens each area's defenses' with language describing a 'proposed high-level blueprint' intended to guide discussion and future work. A brief related-work paragraph will be added noting alignment with NIST migration recommendations at the strategic level. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Vulnerability and risk assessment sections] The vulnerability assessment across the nine layers supplies only qualitative descriptions without error analysis, falsifiable predictions, or worked examples showing how any single component mitigates a concrete quantum attack vector.

    Authors: The layer assessments are qualitative, relying on established properties of Shor's and Grover's algorithms. We will add one short worked example per major layer (e.g., how CRYSTALS-Kyber in the data layer resists Shor's algorithm) to illustrate mitigation. Full error analysis or attack simulations remain outside the paper's scope as a synthesis and proposal. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: qualitative assessment and blueprint proposal contain no derivations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper is a survey-style assessment of quantum threats to infrastructure layers and advocates a nine-component security blueprint. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions derived from data, or mathematical derivations appear in the provided text. The central claim that the blueprint 'strengthens each area's defenses' is presented as an assertion based on component descriptions and general advocacy for post-quantum cryptography, without any reduction to prior author results, self-citations, or input data by construction. Self-citation load-bearing and ansatz smuggling patterns are absent. The derivation chain is empty; the work is self-contained as a high-level framework without quantitative validation or circular logic.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a qualitative review and proposal paper; it introduces no free parameters, mathematical axioms, or new postulated entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5740 in / 979 out tokens · 20473 ms · 2026-05-24T02:21:06.344294+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Future-Proofing Cloud Security Against Quantum Attacks: Risk, Transition, and Mitigation Strategies

    cs.CR 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    This survey analyzes quantum vulnerabilities in cloud computing and provides a structured framework for transitioning to post-quantum cryptography with risk assessments and deployment roadmaps.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

174 extracted references · 174 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer,

    P. W. Shor, “Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer,” SIAM Review , vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 303–332, 1999

    work page 1999

  2. [2]

    Introduction to post- quantum cryptography,

    D. J. Bernstein, J. Buchmann, and E. Dahmen, “Introduction to post- quantum cryptography,” 2009

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    Inventory of public key cryptography in us electric vehicle charging infrastructure,

    P. N. N. Laboratory, “Inventory of public key cryptography in us electric vehicle charging infrastructure,” https://www.pnnl.gov, Tech. Rep., 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    How quantum computing will transform cybersecurity,

    P. Lipman, “How quantum computing will transform cybersecurity,” https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/01/04/ how-quantum-computing-will-transform-cybersecurity/?sh= 604540237d3f, 2023, accessed: 2023-11-08

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Quantum computing and cybersecurity,

    M. Lee, “Quantum computing and cybersecurity,” https://www. belfercenter.org/publication/quantum-computing-and-cybersecurity, 2023, accessed: 2023-11-08

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Cybersecurity in an era with quantum computers: will we be ready?

    M. Mosca, “Cybersecurity in an era with quantum computers: will we be ready?” IEEE Security & Privacy , vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 38–41, 2018

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    How to factor 2048 bit rsa integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits,

    C. Gidney and M. Eker ˚a, “How to factor 2048 bit rsa integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.09749, 2019

    work page arXiv 2048

  8. [8]

    Nist to standardize encryption algorithms that can resist attack by quantum computers,

    N. I. of Standards and Technology, “Nist to standardize encryption algorithms that can resist attack by quantum computers,” https://www. nist.gov, NIST, Tech. Rep., 2023

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Keeping secrets in a quantum world,

    Nature, “Keeping secrets in a quantum world,” Nature, 2023

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Post-quantum cryptography initia- tive,

    Cybersecurity and I. S. Agency, “Post-quantum cryptography initia- tive,” https://www.cisa.gov, CISA, Tech. Rep., 2023

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Explore the impact of quantum computing on cryptogra- phy,

    TechTarget, “Explore the impact of quantum computing on cryptogra- phy,” https://www.techtarget.com, TechTarget, Tech. Rep., 2023

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    The quantum computing threat: Risks and responses,

    ISACA, “The quantum computing threat: Risks and responses,” https: //www.isaca.org, ISACA, Tech. Rep., 2023

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    Post-quantum cryptography,

    D. Bernstein and T. Lange, “Post-quantum cryptography,” Nature, vol. 549, pp. 188–194, 09 2017

    work page 2017

  14. [14]

    Stride-based threat modeling for cyber-physical systems,

    R. Khan, K. McLaughlin, D. Laverty, and S. Sezer, “Stride-based threat modeling for cyber-physical systems,” in 2017 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference Europe (ISGT-Europe) . IEEE, 2017, pp. 1–6

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    Threat modeling of industrial control systems: A systematic literature review,

    S. M. Khalil, H. Bahsi, and T. Kor ˜otko, “Threat modeling of industrial control systems: A systematic literature review,”Computers & Security, p. 103543, 2023

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    A look at quantum resistant encryption & why it’s critical,

    A. Mashatan, “A look at quantum resistant encryption & why it’s critical,” The SSL Store , 2022

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Migration to post- quantum cryptography,

    W. Barker, M. Souppaya, and W. Newhouse, “Migration to post- quantum cryptography,” NIST National Institute of, Standards and Technology and National Cybersecurity, Center of Excellence , pp. 1– 15, 2021

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Quantum cryptography for enhanced network security: A comprehensive survey of research, developments, and future directions,

    M. Shapna Akter, “Quantum cryptography for enhanced network security: A comprehensive survey of research, developments, and future directions,” arXiv e-prints, pp. arXiv–2306, 2023

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring,

    P. W. Shor, “Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring,” Proceedings 35th annual symposium on foundations of computer science, pp. 124–134, 1994

    work page 1994

  20. [20]

    Quantum supremacy using a programmable supercon- ducting processor,

    F. Arute et al., “Quantum supremacy using a programmable supercon- ducting processor,” Nature, vol. 574, no. 7779, pp. 505–510, 2019

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    Quantum computers ready to leap out of the lab in 2017,

    D. Castelvecchi, “Quantum computers ready to leap out of the lab in 2017,” Nature, vol. 541, no. 7635, 2017

    work page 2017

  22. [22]

    Status report on the third round of the nist post-quantum cryp- tography standardization process,

    NIST, “Status report on the third round of the nist post-quantum cryp- tography standardization process,” https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/ detail/nistir/8413/final, 2022, [Online; accessed 28-07-2022]

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    Post-quantum cryptography,

    N. I. of Standards and T. (NIST), “Post-quantum cryptography,” https: //csrc.nist.gov/projects/post-quantum-cryptography, 2023

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Post-quantum cryptography-selected algorithms 2022,

    ——, “Post-quantum cryptography-selected algorithms 2022,” https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/post-quantum-cryptography/ selected-algorithms-2022, 2022

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    State-of-the-art survey of quantum cryp- tography,

    A. Kumar and S. Garhwal, “State-of-the-art survey of quantum cryp- tography,”Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, vol. 28, pp. 3831–3868, 2021

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    Demystifying the quantum threat: infrastructure, insti- tutions, and intelligence advantage,

    J. R. Lindsay, “Demystifying the quantum threat: infrastructure, insti- tutions, and intelligence advantage,” Security Studies , vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 335–361, 2020

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Mitigating 5g security challenges for next-gen industry using quantum computing,

    C. Mangla, S. Rani, N. M. F. Qureshi, and A. Singh, “Mitigating 5g security challenges for next-gen industry using quantum computing,” Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences , vol. 35, no. 6, p. 101334, 2023

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    2022 quantum threat timeline report,

    M. Mosca and M. Piani, “2022 quantum threat timeline report,” Global Risk Insitute, 2022

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    A review of quantum cybersecurity: threats, risks and opportunities,

    M. J. H. Faruk, S. Tahora, M. Tasnim, H. Shahriar, and N. Sakib, “A review of quantum cybersecurity: threats, risks and opportunities,” in 2022 1st International Conference on AI in Cybersecurity (ICAIC) . IEEE, 2022, pp. 1–8

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    Quantum technologies at aws,

    “Quantum technologies at aws,” https://aws.amazon.com/products/ quantum/, 2023, accessed: 2023-11-27

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Azure quantum cloud service,

    “Azure quantum cloud service,” https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/ products/quantum/, 2023, accessed: 2023-11-17

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Google cloud quantum computing service,

    “Google cloud quantum computing service,” https://quantumai.google/ cirq/google/concepts, 2023, accessed: 2023-10-31

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Terminology for Post-Quantum Traditional Hybrid Schemes,

    F. D, “Terminology for Post-Quantum Traditional Hybrid Schemes,” https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-driscoll-pqt-hybrid-terminology/ 02/, Internet Engineering Task Force, Internet-Draft draft-driscoll-pqt- hybrid-terminology-02, Mar. 2023, work in Progress

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Post-quantum cryptography and quantum-safe security,

    I. Rosenberg, “Post-quantum cryptography and quantum-safe security,” IBM Research Blog , 2019

    work page 2019

  35. [35]

    Q.-R. W. G. Q. of the Canadian Forum for Digital Infrastructure Resilience (CFDIR). (2023, Jun.) Canadian national quantum-readiness, best practices and guidelines, version 03. https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/spectrum-management- telecommunications/sites/default/files/attachments/2023/cfdir- quantum-readiness-best-practices-v03.pdf

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Report on post-quantum cryptography,

    L. Chen, S. Jordan, Y .-K. Liu, D. Moody, R. Peralta, R. Perlner, and D. Smith-Tone, “Report on post-quantum cryptography,” US Depart- ment of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2016

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    Quantum-resistant cryptography,

    J. P. Mattsson, B. Smeets, and E. Thormarker, “Quantum-resistant cryptography,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.00399 , 2021

    work page arXiv 2021

  38. [38]

    A cloud services cheat sheet for aws, azure and google cloud,

    TechTarget, “A cloud services cheat sheet for aws, azure and google cloud,” TechTarget, 2021

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Quantum safe hardware security modules,

    Crypto4A, “Quantum safe hardware security modules,” https:// crypto4a.com/hardware-security-modules/, 2023, accessed: 2023-12- 09

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    A comprehensive guide to quantum-resistant encryption,

    Entrust, “A comprehensive guide to quantum-resistant encryption,” https://www.entrust.com/resources/learn/ post-quantum-cryptography-and-encryption, 2023

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    Make the world quantum safe,

    IBM, “Make the world quantum safe,” https://www.ibm.com/quantum/ quantum-safe, 2023, accessed: 2023-12-09

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    A survey on quantum computing technol- ogy,

    L. Gyongyosi and S. Imre, “A survey on quantum computing technol- ogy,” Computer Science Review , vol. 31, pp. 51–71, 2019

    work page 2019

  43. [43]

    Preparing for post-quantum cryptog- raphy,

    N. I. of Standards and T. (NIST), “Preparing for post-quantum cryptog- raphy,” https://www.nist.gov/pqcrypto, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Tech. Rep., 2023, accessed: 2023-10-31

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    Quantum computing, postselection, and probabilistic polynomial-time,

    C. Gidney and M. Eker ˚a, “Quantum computing, postselection, and probabilistic polynomial-time,” Physical Review A , vol. 103, no. 3, p. 032414, 2021

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publi- cation 800-57 Part 1: Recommendation for Key Management , https: //csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-57-part-1/rev-5/final, 2020

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publica- tion 800-38: Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation , https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-38a/final, 2001

    work page 2001

  47. [47]

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publi- cation 800-90A/B/C: Recommendation for Random Number Genera- tion Using Deterministic Random Bit Generators , https://csrc.nist.gov/ publications/detail/sp/800-90a/rev-1/final, 2020

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publi- cation 800-131A: Transitioning the Use of Cryptographic Algorithms and Key Lengths , https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-131a/ rev-2/final, 2019. 23

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    gov/publications/detail/fips/140/2/final, 2001

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, FIPS PUB 140-2: Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules , https://csrc.nist. gov/publications/detail/fips/140/2/final, 2001

    work page 2001

  50. [50]

    gov/publications/detail/fips/140/3/final, 2019

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, FIPS PUB 140-3: Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules , https://csrc.nist. gov/publications/detail/fips/140/3/final, 2019

    work page 2019

  51. [51]

    National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST Special Publica- tion 800-56A/B/C: Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key-Establishment Schemes Using Discrete Logarithm Cryptography, https://csrc.nist.gov/ publications/detail/sp/800-56a/rev-3/final, 2018

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    Use of elliptic curve cryptography (ecc) algorithms in cryptographic message syntax (cms),

    S. Turner and D. Brown, “Use of elliptic curve cryptography (ecc) algorithms in cryptographic message syntax (cms),” Tech. Rep., 2010

    work page 2010

  53. [53]

    Negotiated finite field diffie-hellman ephemeral parame- ters for transport layer security (tls),

    D. Gillmor, “Negotiated finite field diffie-hellman ephemeral parame- ters for transport layer security (tls),” Tech. Rep., 2016

    work page 2016

  54. [54]

    Pkcs# 1: Rsa cryptography specifications version 2.2,

    K. Moriarty, B. Kaliski, J. Jonsson, and A. Rusch, “Pkcs# 1: Rsa cryptography specifications version 2.2,” Tech. Rep., 2016

    work page 2016

  55. [55]

    Use of the advanced encryption standard (aes) encryption algorithm in cryptographic message syntax (cms),

    J. Schaad, “Use of the advanced encryption standard (aes) encryption algorithm in cryptographic message syntax (cms),” Tech. Rep., 2003

    work page 2003

  56. [56]

    A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search,

    L. K. Grover, “A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search,” in Proceedings of the twenty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing , 1996, pp. 212–219

    work page 1996

  57. [57]

    Us secure hash algorithms (sha and sha-based hmac and hkdf),

    D. Eastlake 3rd and T. Hansen, “Us secure hash algorithms (sha and sha-based hmac and hkdf),” Tech. Rep., 2011

    work page 2011

  58. [58]

    Quantum Algorithm for the Collision Problem

    G. Brassard, P. Hoyer, and A. Tapp, “Quantum algorithm for the collision problem,” arXiv preprint quant-ph/9705002 , 1997

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  59. [59]

    Practical cca2-secure and masked ring-lwe implementation,

    T. Oder, T. Schneider, T. P ¨oppelmann, and T. G ¨uneysu, “Practical cca2-secure and masked ring-lwe implementation,” Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2016

    work page 2016

  60. [60]

    Drop by drop you break the rock-exploiting generic vulnerabilities in lattice-based pke/kems using em-based physical attacks,

    P. Ravi, S. Bhasin, S. S. Roy, and A. Chattopadhyay, “Drop by drop you break the rock-exploiting generic vulnerabilities in lattice-based pke/kems using em-based physical attacks,” Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2020

    work page 2020

  61. [61]

    Number “not used

    P. Ravi, D. B. Roy, S. Bhasin, A. Chattopadhyay, and D. Mukhopad- hyay, “Number “not used” once-practical fault attack on pqm4 imple- mentations of nist candidates,” in International Workshop on Construc- tive Side-Channel Analysis and Secure Design . Springer, 2019, pp. 232–250

    work page 2019

  62. [62]

    Chosen ciphertext k- trace attacks on masked cca2 secure kyber,

    M. Hamburg, J. Hermelink, R. Primas, S. Samardjiska, T. Schamberger, S. Streit, E. Strieder, and C. van Vredendaal, “Chosen ciphertext k- trace attacks on masked cca2 secure kyber,” IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems , pp. 88–113, 2021

    work page 2021

  63. [63]

    More practical single-trace attacks on the number theoretic transform,

    P. Pessl and R. Primas, “More practical single-trace attacks on the number theoretic transform,” in International Conference on Cryptol- ogy and Information Security in Latin America . Springer, 2019, pp. 130–149

    work page 2019

  64. [64]

    Breaking a fifth-order masked implementation of crystals-kyber by copy-paste,

    E. Dubrova, K. Ngo, and J. G ¨artner, “Breaking a fifth-order masked implementation of crystals-kyber by copy-paste,” Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2022

    work page 2022

  65. [65]

    Generic side- channel attacks on cca-secure lattice-based pke and kems

    P. Ravi, S. S. Roy, A. Chattopadhyay, and S. Bhasin, “Generic side- channel attacks on cca-secure lattice-based pke and kems.”IACR Trans. Cryptogr. Hardw. Embed. Syst., vol. 2020, no. 3, pp. 307–335, 2020

    work page 2020

  66. [66]

    Magnifying side-channel leakage of lattice-based cryptosystems with chosen ciphertexts: the case study of kyber,

    Z. Xu, O. Pemberton, S. S. Roy, D. Oswald, W. Yao, and Z. Zheng, “Magnifying side-channel leakage of lattice-based cryptosystems with chosen ciphertexts: the case study of kyber,” IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 2163–2176, 2021

    work page 2021

  67. [67]

    On exploiting message leakage in (few) nist pqc candidates for practical message recovery attacks,

    P. Ravi, S. Bhasin, S. S. Roy, and A. Chattopadhyay, “On exploiting message leakage in (few) nist pqc candidates for practical message recovery attacks,” IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, vol. 17, pp. 684–699, 2021

    work page 2021

  68. [68]

    Cold boot attacks on ring and module lwe keys under the ntt,

    M. R. Albrecht, A. Deo, and K. G. Paterson, “Cold boot attacks on ring and module lwe keys under the ntt,” Cryptology ePrint Archive , 2018

    work page 2018

  69. [69]

    Differential fault attacks on determin- istic lattice signatures,

    L. G. Bruinderink and P. Pessl, “Differential fault attacks on determin- istic lattice signatures,”IACR Transactions on Cryptographic Hardware and Embedded Systems , pp. 21–43, 2018

    work page 2018

  70. [70]

    Masking dilithium,

    V . Migliore, B. G ´erard, M. Tibouchi, and P.-A. Fouque, “Masking dilithium,” in International Conference on Applied Cryptography and Network Security. Springer, 2019, pp. 344–362

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    Profiling side-channel attacks on dilithium: A small bit-fiddling leak breaks it all,

    S. Marzougui, V . Ulitzsch, M. Tibouchi, and J.-P. Seifert, “Profiling side-channel attacks on dilithium: A small bit-fiddling leak breaks it all,” Cryptology ePrint Archive , 2022

    work page 2022

  72. [72]

    Exploiting determinism in lattice-based signatures: practical fault attacks on pqm4 implementations of nist candidates,

    P. Ravi, M. P. Jhanwar, J. Howe, A. Chattopadhyay, and S. Bhasin, “Exploiting determinism in lattice-based signatures: practical fault attacks on pqm4 implementations of nist candidates,” in Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2019, pp. 427–440

    work page 2019

  73. [73]

    An end-to-end analysis of emfi on bit-sliced post-quantum implementations,

    R. Singh, S. Islam, B. Sunar, and P. Schaumont, “An end-to-end analysis of emfi on bit-sliced post-quantum implementations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06153, 2022

    work page arXiv 2022

  74. [74]

    Bearz attack falcon: implementation attacks with countermeasures on the falcon signature scheme,

    S. McCarthy, J. Howe, N. Smyth, S. Brannigan, and M. O’Neill, “Bearz attack falcon: implementation attacks with countermeasures on the falcon signature scheme,” Cryptology ePrint Archive , 2019

    work page 2019

  75. [75]

    Falcon down: Breaking falcon post- quantum signature scheme through side-channel attacks,

    E. Karabulut and A. Aysu, “Falcon down: Breaking falcon post- quantum signature scheme through side-channel attacks,” in 2021 58th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) . IEEE, 2021, pp. 691–696

    work page 2021

  76. [76]

    Attacking and defending the mceliece cryptosystem,

    D. J. Bernstein, T. Lange, and C. Peters, “Attacking and defending the mceliece cryptosystem,” in International Workshop on Post-Quantum Cryptography. Springer, 2008, pp. 31–46

    work page 2008

  77. [77]

    Side channels in the mceliece pkc,

    F. Strenzke, E. Tews, H. G. Molter, R. Overbeck, and A. Shoufan, “Side channels in the mceliece pkc,” in International Workshop on Post-Quantum Cryptography. Springer, 2008, pp. 216–229

    work page 2008

  78. [78]

    A fault attack on the niederreiter cryp- tosystem using binary irreducible goppa codes,

    M. Kreuzer and J. Danner, “A fault attack on the niederreiter cryp- tosystem using binary irreducible goppa codes,” journal of Groups, complexity, cryptology, vol. 12, 2020

    work page 2020

  79. [79]

    Message-recovery laser fault injection attack on code-based cryptosys- tems

    P.-L. Cayrel, B. Colombier, V .-F. Dragoi, A. Menu, and L. Bossuet, “Message-recovery laser fault injection attack on code-based cryptosys- tems.” IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch. , vol. 2020, p. 900, 2020

    work page 2020

  80. [80]

    Countermeasure against the spa attack on an embedded mceliece cryptosystem,

    M. Petrvalsky, T. Richmond, M. Drutarovsky, P.-L. Cayrel, and V . a. Fischer, “Countermeasure against the spa attack on an embedded mceliece cryptosystem,” in 2015 25th International Conference Ra- dioelektronika (RADIOELEKTRONIKA). IEEE, 2015, pp. 462–466

    work page 2015

Showing first 80 references.