On 2020-05-09 14:34, i...@aulix.com wrote: > D-waves has too uncoupled qubits if I understand it correctly, it is nothing > to do about qubits quantity as we used to think about it. Like a "cluster" of > completely isolated hosts (which is already not a cluster or course).
I don't care for the details. D-waves tech has no hope of breaking any crypto in use today is what I have heard from reputable sources. Googles needs to go from 53 to an estimated more than 3000 for nistp-521 with each one being exponentially harder to manage. RSA 8192/4096 are the next best options but RSA takes exponentially longer to generate larger keys. Don't worry. The work is to be ready in case someone with enough funds makes a breakthrough. There is almost zero chance for many many years. You can always mix in a static symmetric key, if really needed or encrypt the data first with a static key? Wireguard offers mixing in a static key as an optional extra config option but wireguard has chosen not to support AES, so will be a lot slower on many modern processors and microchips that have AES hw support. The wireguard author seems to think the opposite about micro support, but he is wrong.
