this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
72 points (97.4% liked)
Apple
17482 readers
38 users here now
Welcome
to the largest Apple community on Lemmy. This is the place where we talk about everything Apple, from iOS to the exciting upcoming Apple Vision Pro. Feel free to join the discussion!
Rules:
- No NSFW Content
- No Hate Speech or Personal Attacks
- No Ads / Spamming
Self promotion is only allowed in the pinned monthly thread
Communities of Interest:
Apple Hardware
Apple TV
Apple Watch
iPad
iPhone
Mac
Vintage Apple
Apple Software
iOS
iPadOS
macOS
tvOS
watchOS
Shortcuts
Xcode
Community banner courtesy of u/Antsomnia.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Quantum or tell me that you fall in the pseudoscientific trap.
This is about them adding post-quantum encryption, which means encryption that could survive an attack using quantum computers.
This is computer science and mathematics, not pseudoscientific crap.
My sentence wasn't that litteral. It's pseudoscientific crap marketing. "Quantum security" isn't "survive attacks using quantum computers". It's completely pedantic.
The issue with this usage is that the meaning of the words disappears.
“Quantum security” is a fairly widely accepted term in the industry and it has meaning.
Other terms with the same or similar meaning are quantum cryptography or post-quantum security.
https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/whitepaper/quantum-security-technologies
https://thequantuminsider.com/2023/07/17/quantum-security/
https://www.nomios.com/resources/what-is-quantum-security/
https://www.weforum.org/global_future_councils/gfc-on-cybersecurity/projects/quantum-security/
https://docs.paloaltonetworks.com/network-security/quantum-security/administration/quantum-security-concepts
https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/quantum-security-and-cryptography-in-hashicorp-vault
https://blog.1password.com/passkeys-quantum-computers-encryption/
It's my point. I never ever wrote the term doesn't exist nor the term isn't valid.