Quantum computers inch closer?

David Wagner daw at mozart.cs.berkeley.edu
Mon Sep 2 20:19:08 EDT 2002


Ed Gerck  wrote:
>The original poster is correct, however, in that a metric function can
>be defined
>and used by a QC to calculate the distance between a random state and an
>eigenstate with some desired properties, and thereby allow the QC to define
>when that distance is zero -- which provides the needle-in-the-haystack
>solution,
>even though each random state vector can be seen as a mixed state and will, with
>higher probability, be representable by a linear combination of eigenvectors
>with random coefficients, rather than by a single eigenvector.

I must admit I can't for the life of me figure out what this paragraph
was supposed to mean.  Maybe that's quantum for you.

But I take it we agree: The original poster's suggested "scheme" for
cracking Feistel ciphers doesn't work, because quantum computers don't
work like that.  Agreed?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at wasabisystems.com



More information about the cryptography mailing list