Re: LUKS and quantum computing
Arno Wagner <[email protected]> Tue, 26 Nov 2024 09:39:01 +0100
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.cryptsetup |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
No idea. And frankly, I have stopped caring. "Quantum Computing" is a Fata Morgana that does not amount to anything practical at this time (after 50 years of resarch) and may well never amount to anything. It will certainly not be a real treat in the foreseeable future. Here is what Peter Gitman thinks of the topic, and I think it is spot on: https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/bollocks.pdf Regards, Arno On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 23:13:17 CET, Patrick Callaghan wrote: > If we use LUKS encryption with SHA-256 configured (i.e. the default), is > this considered safe against attacks by quantum computers? > > I ask because NIST suggests SHA512 in general for quantum safe algorithms > (see "old Q17" in > https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/post-quantum-cryptography/faqs) and we want > to be LUKS quantum safe now and for several years to come, even if no > practical attacks currently exist. > > Note, the cipher we use is "aes-xts-plain64" so we have no question about > this as AES with 256-bit keys is considered quantum safe. > > Thank you. -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., Email: [email protected] GnuPG: ID: CB5D9718 FP: 12D6 C03B 1B30 33BB 13CF B774 E35C 5FA1 CB5D 9718 ---- A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers. -- Plato If it's in the news, don't worry about it. The very definition of "news" is "something that hardly ever happens." -- Bruce Schneier