Post-Quantum Cryptography: The Future of Digital Security?


Futureproofing Our Security


In our increasingly connected world, the security of digital information has never been more critical. From banking transactions to private communications, our data is constantly transmitted and stored across the internet. 


The current systems that protect this data rely on cryptography, a branch of mathematics that helps keep information secure by encoding it in ways that are difficult to decode without the proper key. However, with the rise of quantum computers, traditional cryptography is facing new and significant threats. This is where Post-Quantum Cryptography comes into play.


What is Post-Quantum Cryptography?


Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC)[1]  refers to cryptographic algorithms that are specifically designed to be secure against the power of quantum computers. 


Quantum computers, once they become practical, will be capable of solving complex mathematical problems much faster than classical computers. This will render many of the encryption methods we rely on today [such as RSA (Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman – initials of the inventors) and ECC (Elliptic Curve Cryptography)] vulnerable to attack.


Quantum computers operate on quantum bits, or “qubits”, which can exist in multiple states simultaneously, unlike classical bits that are either a zer (0) or one (1). This allows quantum computers to perform certain calculations exponentially faster than classical computers. For example, in a matter of seconds, a quantum computer could potentially break an RSA key, which is considered secure by today’s standards. As quantum computing technology advances, the need for PQC becomes even more urgent. 

The Potential Threats Posed by Quantum Computers


Quantum computers present a serious threat to the existing infrastructure of digital security. 


It is widely accepted that, at the core of this threat, is Shor’s algorithm [2] - a quantum algorithm that can efficiently solve integer factorization (the problem behind RSA encryption) and the discrete logarithm problem (which ECC relies on). With this capability, a quantum computer could easily break the public-key cryptography that supports much of the world’s internet security.


The most immediate concern, once quantum computers become widely available, is the possibility of data being intercepted and decrypted by malicious actors. Sensitive data, including government communications, financial transactions, and medical records, could be exposed. The danger for the future is that, once quantum computers become powerful enough to break the encryption, encrypted information stored today may become vulnerable.


Another major concern is the potential for “harvesting” data today for future decryption. Even though quantum computers are not yet capable of cracking encryption, adversaries could start collecting encrypted data now with the intention of decrypting it later, when quantum computers become viable. This is often referred to as “harvest-now, decrypt-later” attacks[3].


Why is Post-Quantum Cryptography Important?


The importance of PQC lies in its potential to secure our digital future. As we move closer to a reality where quantum computers become powerful enough to threaten current encryption methods, PQC offers a solution to this impending challenge. 


By developing cryptographic algorithms that are resistant to quantum attacks, PQC ensures that our data remains secure in a world where quantum computing would (by then) be commonplace.


PQC is not about simply preparing for a future problem: it is about addressing a threat that is becoming increasingly tangible. Worldwide, governments, financial institutions, and healthcare corporations are already beginning to invest in PQC research to develop and standardize algorithms that, they hope, will head off this impending threat. 


The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)[4] has already launched a project to evaluate and standardize post-quantum cryptographic algorithms, which will likely provide a blueprint for the future of digital security.

Potential Victims of Quantum Computing Threats


The potential victims of quantum computing threats are wide-ranging. Anyone who relies on encrypted data for security could be affected. Potential targets could include:


Governments: Sensitive government data, national security information, and diplomatic communications could be decrypted, potentially compromising national security.


Financial Institutions: Banks and other financial institutions (including insurance companies) rely heavily on encryption to secure transactions, protect customer data, and maintain trust. Quantum attacks could put billions of dollars at risk.


Healthcare Providers: Medical records are sensitive and often contain private health information. If compromised, this could lead to identity theft or blackmail.


Corporations/Businesses: Any enterprise that stores personal or financial information could be targeted.


As you can appreciate, any incursion into the backend systems of these types of organizations could have devastating effects!


Expected Benefits from Investing in Post-Quantum Cryptography


There are a number of reasons for organizations to invest into PQC. These reasons include...


Future-Proof Security: Investing in PQC today ensures that systems are resilient to the threats posed by quantum computing in the future. This proactive approach to security helps mitigate the risk of having to urgently upgrade or overhaul systems when quantum computers become operational.


Collaboration and Innovation: The development of PQC algorithms requires collaboration between researchers, cryptographers, and engineers from various fields. This collaboration promotes innovation, leading to the creation of new technologies and security solutions that can benefit society as a whole.


Protection of Sensitive Data: With the potential for quantum computers to break encryption, PQC offers a way to protect sensitive data, such as classified government communications, financial transactions, medical records, personal information, and intellectual property. By adopting PQC algorithms, organizations can ensure that their data remains secure, as quantum computing develops.


Economic and Competitive Advantage: As the world moves toward quantum-safe encryption, early adopters of PQC will have a competitive edge. Organizations that invest in PQC will be seen as leaders in securing their systems, which can enhance their reputation and trustworthiness. This is particularly valuable for industries that handle sensitive or confidential information, such as government, finance, and healthcare.


Possible Disadvantages of Investing in Post-Quantum Cryptography


On the other hand, there are a few negative aspects to consider regarding investing in PQC...


Uncertainty and Evolution: Quantum computing is still in its infancy and, while progress is being made, the exact timeline for the development of practical quantum computers is uncertain.  Some experts expect it to take decades before quantum computers could be capable of breaking current encryption methods. This timeline disparity causes significant uncertainty. In turn, this uncertainty raises the question of whether investing in PQC now is premature, or whether we are acting wisely by preparing for an inevitable future threat.


Complexity of Implementation: PQC algorithms are often more computationally intensive and complex than traditional cryptographic methods. Implementing PQC may require significant changes to existing systems, which could be time-consuming and resource-intensive. These technical challenges could delay the widespread adoption of PQC.


Incompatibility with Current Systems: Integrating PQC into existing infrastructures may present compatibility issues, especially with older systems or devices that were not designed with quantum-resistant algorithms in mind. Transitioning from classical to quantum-resistant cryptography will require careful planning and coordination across industries and sectors.


Over-Engineering: In the rush to develop quantum-resistant systems, there is a risk of over-engineering solutions. Some organizations may invest in PQC before the technology is fully matured, resulting in wasted resources, or the adoption of algorithms that, ultimately, prove to be unnecessary.



Viable Remedies


To mitigate the risks posed by quantum computers, it would be wise to begin transitioning to Post-Quantum Cryptography as soon as possible.  And while fully quantum-secure systems may not be practical yet, there are steps that organizations can take to start their preparations now:


Monitor Research and Developments: Stay updated on the latest developments in PQC research, as new algorithms and standards are continually being tested and refined. 


Start Planning for Transition: Organizations should begin planning their migration to quantum-resistant algorithms. This could include evaluating current encryption methods, identifying potential vulnerabilities, and developing a roadmap for future-proofing systems.


Gradual Integration: As PQC standards evolve, organizations can begin implementing hybrid systems that combine traditional cryptography with quantum-resistant algorithms. Working with experts in the field can help to ensure that any potential transition to PQC will be smooth and effective. Using a hybrid approach can help ensure that systems will remain secure during the transition period.


The Future?


Post-Quantum Cryptography looks as though it is going to be an essential part of the future of digital security. As quantum computers evolve, traditional encryption methods may no longer be enough to protect sensitive data. 


By investing in PQC, organizations can safeguard themselves against the potential threats posed by quantum computing and ensure that their digital systems will remain secure in the future. 


While the road to quantum-safe encryption is not without its challenges, the benefits far outweigh the risks. By beginning the process now, organizations can ensure a secure digital future.


===


Resources / Further Reading:


[1] https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/alerts/2022/07/05/prepare-new-cryptographic-standard-protect-against-future-quantum-based-threats Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. July 05, 2022. Retrieved February 18, 2025.

https://csrc.nist.gov/News/2024/postquantum-cryptography-fips-approved NIST Computer Security Respource Center. August 13, 2024. Retrieved February 18, 2025.

https://www.dhs.gov/quantum Homeland Security. January 28, 2025. Retrieved February 18, 2025.


[2] Shor’s Algorithm (explained) – YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvTqbM5Dq4Q 

Shor’s Algorithm: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor%27s_algorithm 


[3] Harvest Now, Decrypt Later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvest_now,_decrypt_later 


[4] https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2024/08/nist-releases-first-3-finalized-post-quantum-encryption-standards National Institute of Standards and Technology. August 13, 2024. Retrieved February 18, 2025.

 ===

#Cybersecurity #Cryptography #PostQuantumCryptography 

===

About NC-Expert

NC-Expert is a privately-held California corporation and is well established within the Wireless, Security, and Collaboration industry certification training, courseware development, and consulting markets.

NC-Expert has won numerous private contracts with Fortune level companies around the world. These customers have depended on NC-Expert to train, advise, and mentor their staff.

So remember, if you are looking for the best IT training just call us at (855) 941-2121 or contact us

NC-Expert Blog

Wi-Fi Myth Series - Myth #7: Roaming Problems are Always Client Problems

By Rie Morgan • July 23, 2026
Few phrases trigger a knowing smile from experienced Wi-Fi engineers quite like this one, "It's the client's fault." Someone's video call drops while walking through the office or a warehouse scanner pauses between aisles, voice handsets crackle as users move from one floor to another... then, almost immediately, someone points at the device and confidently declares, "Well... clients decide when to roam." Technically, they're correct. But, practically, that's only part of the story. Roaming is one of the most fascinating aspects of Wi-Fi because it isn't controlled by a single device or a single setting. It's a partnership between the client, the infrastructure, and the RF environment. When that partnership breaks down, blaming one side rarely tells the whole story. Let's bust another myth... Yes, Clients Make the Decision Let's start with the important truth: in almost every Wi-Fi deployment, the client device ultimately decides when to leave one AP and join another. Laptops, smartphones, tablets, barcode scanners, medical devices, and countless IoT products all use their own roaming algorithms. Some roam aggressively whereas some cling to their current AP for far too long. Others seem convinced that losing the connection entirely is preferable to switching. Every Wi-Fi engineer has encountered at least one stubborn client that appears almost “emotionally attached” to a particular AP. :) Client behavior matters, but that's not where the story ends.

Wi-Fi Myth Series – Myth #6: A Site Survey Is Optional

By Rie Morgan • July 17, 2026
Every Wi-Fi engineer has heard some version of it, "Can't we just install the access points where the old ones were?" Or perhaps, "The floorplan looks straightforward. Let's save some time and skip the survey." Occasionally, someone even says the dangerous words, "We've done hundreds of these buildings. They're all basically the same." That's usually the point where experienced wireless engineers quietly smile, knowing that the building is about to teach everyone a valuable lesson because: buildings don't read design guides, concrete doesn't care about your deployment schedule, metal doesn't respect your project budget, and radio waves have never once agreed to cooperate, simply because everyone wanted them to. Let's talk about why a site survey isn't an optional luxury... it's one of the most valuable engineering tools available. Every Building Is Different At first glance, two office buildings may appear identical: same square footage, same number of floors, similar room layouts, yet their wireless behavior can be dramatically different: one may have reinforced concrete walls, another may contain extensive glass partitions, the warehouse may be filled with moving inventory, a hospital may have elevators, imaging equipment, and countless reflective surfaces, a manufacturing facility may contain machinery that wasn't mentioned on any floorplan, and remember: even furniture changes RF behavior! Anyone who has performed enough surveys eventually develops a healthy respect for one simple fact: the building always gets a vote, too!

Wi-Fi Myth Series - Myth #5: Wider Channels Always Mean Better Performance

By Rie Morgan • July 13, 2026
There is something wonderfully satisfying about seeing a Wi-Fi channel get wider: twenty megahertz becomes forty. Forty becomes eighty. Eighty becomes one hundred and sixty. This begs the question: more bandwidth must mean more speed... right? Well... sometimes. Like many things in Wi-Fi engineering, the answer begins with, "It depends." The idea that wider channels always deliver better performance has become surprisingly common. It's an understandable conclusion because, in theory, wider channels can carry more data. More lanes on a highway should allow more traffic to flow. But Wi-Fi isn't driven by theory alone. The RF environment has an annoying habit of reminding us that physics always gets the final vote. Let's explore why bigger isn't always better... More Lanes... But Fewer Roads Imagine a city with only a handful of highways. If you combine four lanes into one giant superhighway, each individual vehicle might travel faster. Unfortunately, you've also eliminated several independent routes that other drivers could have used. That's exactly what happens with channel bonding: - An 80 MHz channel occupies the same spectrum as four adjacent 20 MHz channels. - A 160 MHz channel consumes eight. While you've increased the potential throughput available to one transmission, you've dramatically reduced the number of separate channels available for everyone else. In an empty environment, this is often perfectly acceptable. But, in a busy enterprise? Not so much.