TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Factoring 2048 RSA integers in 177 days with 13436 qubits and a multimode memory

240 pointsby athul7744about 4 years ago

13 comments

tbabejabout 4 years ago
This paper basically explores a hypothetical scenario where scaling quantum memory ends up being cheaper than scaling computational qubits. The title (or abstract) unfortunately does not mention the quantum memory requirements at n=2048 explicitly.<p>For factoring 2048 RSA integers, the technique proposed in the paper would require ~430 million memory qubits (see the table at top of page 16).
评论 #26555044 未加载
评论 #26555909 未加载
评论 #26554914 未加载
评论 #26555181 未加载
stirloabout 4 years ago
Just to be clear such a machine has not yet been built. This is only a theoretical paper at the moment.
评论 #26554257 未加载
评论 #26554235 未加载
评论 #26555101 未加载
评论 #26554513 未加载
haltingproblemabout 4 years ago
I fear it is my obligation to point out this excellent screed by Scott Lockin: &quot;Quantum computing as a field is obvious bullshit&quot;. A beautiful excerpt from the article:<p><i>When I say Quantum Computing is a bullshit field, I don’t mean everything in the field is bullshit, though to first order, this appears to be approximately true. I don’t have a mathematical proof that Quantum Computing isn’t at least theoretically possible. I also do not have a mathematical proof that we can or can’t make the artificial bacteria of K. Eric Drexler’s nanotech fantasies. Yet, I know both fields are bullshit. Both fields involve forming new kinds of matter that we haven’t the slightest idea how to construct. Neither field has a sane ‘first step’ to make their large claims true.<p>.....<p>“quantum computing” enthusiasts expect you to overlook the fact that they haven’t a clue as to how to build and manipulate quantum coherent forms of matter necessary to achieve quantum computation. A quantum computer capable of truly factoring the number 21 is missing in action. In fact, the factoring of the number 15 into 3 and 5 is a bit of a parlour trick, as they design the experiment while knowing the answer, thus leaving out the gates required if we didn’t know how to factor 15. The actual number of gates needed to factor a n-bit number is 72 x n^3; so for 15, it’s 4 bits, 4608 gates; not happening any time soon.</i><p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;scottlocklin.wordpress.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;01&#x2F;15&#x2F;quantum-computing-as-a-field-is-obvious-bullshit&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;scottlocklin.wordpress.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;01&#x2F;15&#x2F;quantum-comput...</a>
评论 #26561617 未加载
评论 #26559483 未加载
ThePhysicistabout 4 years ago
The authors hide the fact that this would require millions of memory qubits (which need to be as accurate as the normal qubits), so the title is a bit misleading IMHO.
jakozaurabout 4 years ago
One day you can start calculating private keys based on public keys.<p>This is the biggest crypto puzzle: find private key of Sathoshi Bitcoin wallet with 1 mln bitcoins. Over $50 Bln prize for one crypto puzzle.<p>This would be AlphaGo moment of quantum computing if you could make that one attack successful even while paying huge price (e.g. years of quantum datacenter work).
评论 #26555875 未加载
评论 #26558395 未加载
评论 #26560188 未加载
评论 #26555786 未加载
评论 #26558087 未加载
评论 #26559249 未加载
jeplerabout 4 years ago
Besides the number of qbits, is &quot;multimode memory&quot; real or hypothetical?
评论 #26554642 未加载
davidmurdochabout 4 years ago
This reminds me to listen to MC Frontalot&#x27;s Secrets from the Future again. If you haven&#x27;t heard it yet, you&#x27;re in for a treat! <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;FUPstXCqyus" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;FUPstXCqyus</a>
zozbot234about 4 years ago
That&#x27;s just 6.56 qubits per factored RSA integer - or alternately, 11.57 days per factored RSA integer. Quite impressive either way!
评论 #26554602 未加载
2iP1zbRabout 4 years ago
layman here. i understand that if said theoretical computer did exist, encrypted stored data using today&#x27;s standards is for the most part compromised, outside of further obfuscation, which the popular opinion seems to believe only helps so much.<p>that means the past is compromised, with some amount of implementation afterwards. i&#x27;ve always wondered just how much the future is compromised.<p>i&#x27;ve always thought about encryption this way:<p><pre><code> P = some degree of computational power A = some small unit of P, like a laptop B = the largest unit of P practically possible under the same laws of physics as A (data encrypted by A cannot be &quot;cracked&quot; by B in a reasonable amount of time) </code></pre> so in my head, so long as a normal civilian can access qubit technology (likely questionable), encryption still works by increasing the number of rounds. what am i missing?<p>edited for format, then again for clarity
评论 #26559684 未加载
dzdtabout 4 years ago
Quantum computers of this scale are probably 5-15 years out. Basically this is a warning that if you have secrets that should still be kept secret over that timeframe, you should not be using RSA today.
评论 #26554388 未加载
评论 #26554436 未加载
评论 #26554610 未加载
评论 #26557816 未加载
kjroseabout 4 years ago
It&#x27;s an interesting theory but like most items in quantum computing it is purely theoretical. Not sure how much it would cost to build.<p>I hope someone gets a grant to work out the engineering difficulties in this.
评论 #26556623 未加载
stkaiabout 4 years ago
Could anyone take a stab at the cost of such a computer, if it were possible to build today? Like, I know there are computers of &lt;100 qubits, but how much does one cost?
isolliabout 4 years ago
Side question: if quantum computers fulfill their promise, won&#x27;t they break encryption as we know it? Are we ready for that kind of upheaval?
评论 #26554991 未加载
评论 #26554742 未加载