FRESH

Hacker News

Robust and efficient quantum-safe HTTPS

118 points by tptacek

by utopiah

1 subcomments

FWIW if you want to tinker on the topic I recommend OQS https://github.com/open-quantum-safe/ including Chromium, Apache, nginx, curl, etc. It's quite fun to play with.

by kro

1 subcomments

The title is vague, my first thought was "We already have MLKEM". Which is enough against passive attackers.
The article apparently is about the CA/certs for authenticating the server, a part of HTTPS

by boutell

1 subcomments

The pivot to MTC is a big change in the infrastructure of https. I wish other browsers were at least mentioned in this blog post. I'm curious about the future of letsencrypt as well.

by Veserv

3 subcomments

While I appreciate more efficient and compact representations, I fail to see why this is particularly necessary. This article [1] on the same topic indicates a naive PQ chain is only ~40x the size of a current 4 KB chain. That means it is just ~160 KB.
If you have the legal minimum to be considered broadband in the US, you need ~100 Mbps, so that would add ~12 ms.
If you can stream one 4K video, you need ~20-40 Mbps, so that would add ~30-60 ms.
If you can stream one 1080p video you need to ~3-6 Mbps, so that would add ~200-400 ms.
Even on just a 1 Mbps connection, just barely enough to stream a single 480p video that would only add ~1 second.
And I doubt the weight of most of pages is lower than 160 KB. Many of them are probably dramatically higher, so the total effect of a extra 160 KB is just a few percent.
If there is a problem, it seems like it would be with poorly designed protocols and infrastructure which should be fixed as well instead of papering them over.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/security/2026/02/google-is-using-cle...

by Helloyello

0 subcomment

[dead]