Great explanation (also the example that follows) Quick question: can you refer me to the reason of : if A and N do not share common divider then there is a P where A to the power of P = mXN+1?

There is one misrepresentation though: By far not all encryption on the Internet is based on the assumption that factoring integers is hard. In fact, reliance on this computational hardness assumption is pretty much exclusive to RSA (though there also exist very rarely used variants of the Schnorr signature scheme that seek to increase their security in this manner).

Most asymmetric schemes used on the Internet are based on the computational hardness assumption regarding calculating discrete logarithms[1], in particular Diffie-Hellman and its elliptic curve derivates.

And symmetric ciphers, which are used to encrypt the bulk of the data, are generally based on neither. Simply put, block ciphers (the most common type) are usually based on combining reversible, simple operations such as XOR, table-based substitution ("S boxes") and bit permutations, and repeatedly applying them for N rounds such that the resulting function becomes mathematically "unapproachable" by any known means.

[1] which however can also be done using Shor's algorithm.

Holy shit, if you tap "left arrow" at 3:10 just after Henry finishes saying "quantum", you'll land exactly when he said "computer" on 3:05. Quantum tunneling through a video.

Hey i tried factoring that number which you said took you 9 minutes, but it's repeatedly showing insufficient memory error!!, how much RAM did you had????

Wow thanks, it's nice to see an in-depth description that isn't so jargon laden that I can still … kinda … follow it. Man all that "1 more than a multiple of N" stuff would have been pretty dense if I hadn't already been familiar with modular arithmetic though. I also, before seeing this, thought that discrete log encryption was safe against Shor's algorithm, but it seems that that's precisely what it does! Daaannnngg

Dashlane ad disclosure should occur at the beginning of the video, not jury before the ad itself. The video is strongly relevant to internet security so the fact that it was sponsored by an internet security company is extremely relevant and should be made clear before the video begins.

So if Moore's law holds for quantum computers (number of qubits), which I guess is quite the "if", we've got about 16 years to transition to new types of encryption. That's assuming no better algorithms are discovered in that time.

So how far are we from developing a quantum computer powerful enough to run this algorithm? If the public info is less than 10 years, several governments are probably already doing it lol. I get the feeling that while development on it at the moment is slow, there only needs to be a few breakthroughs and suddenly "ok don't put anything sensitive on the internet for a few years while we work out quantum cryptography" becomes a thing….

Pretty fine idea.. Meaby we can stop concentrate energy to NAME whole superposition particle and just accept it in sumary we get.. Reverse analysis it is not be possible but what ever we need broke the lock! It is same principle like on linear equation where you can get good sumary by manny way and all is good.. Reverse analysis it is also dificult to get same way.. If you catch my meaning.. We just meaby need neural net do the job without thinking about how mashine make it.. Coz algorithm what will be solve dat problem will be evolving..

So . . . . magic. Don't you tell me that was math, you just spoke sorcery! You're lucky I didn't gather a mob of villagers with pitchforks and torches!

1:51 By the way the factors for that are: 8623 × 1418 402449 × 491390 470288 920494 907091 × 9 023663 461465 973601 719932 809325 754174 066323 (43 digits)

Quantum computers will not break encryption… as they will first be used to make it stronger so that when quantum computers hit the consumer market (if they ever will) the encryption will be strong enough as it is today.

Being a quantum computer is hell…

And not hell.

Great explanation (also the example that follows)

Quick question: can you refer me to the reason of : if A and N do not share common divider then there is a P where A to the power of P = mXN+1?

Awesome explanation (and presentation)!

There is one misrepresentation though: By far not all encryption on the Internet is based on the assumption that factoring integers is hard. In fact, reliance on this computational hardness assumption is pretty much exclusive to RSA (though there also exist very rarely used variants of the Schnorr signature scheme that seek to increase their security in this manner).

Most asymmetric schemes used on the Internet are based on the computational hardness assumption regarding calculating discrete logarithms[1], in particular Diffie-Hellman and its elliptic curve derivates.

And symmetric ciphers, which are used to encrypt the bulk of the data, are generally based on neither. Simply put, block ciphers (the most common type) are usually based on combining reversible, simple operations such as XOR, table-based substitution ("S boxes") and bit permutations, and repeatedly applying them for N rounds such that the resulting function becomes mathematically "unapproachable" by any known means.

[1] which however can

alsobe done using Shor's algorithm.Holy shit, if you tap "left arrow" at 3:10 just after Henry finishes saying "quantum", you'll land exactly when he said "computer" on 3:05. Quantum tunneling through a video.

Best explanation of Shor's algorithm for non-physicist!

Whaaat?

There is a videoooooooooooooooooo

10:17 says "this equation is a tad subtle and may not immediately be clear", i thought we already reached that part.

This is so well explained!

*seventeenminutesphysics

Hey i tried factoring that number which you said took you 9 minutes, but it's repeatedly showing insufficient memory error!!, how much RAM did you had????

So, if quantum computing became the norm, would it basically kill ransomware? Or am I not understanding

Wow thanks, it's nice to see an in-depth description that isn't so jargon laden that I can still … kinda … follow it. Man all that "1 more than a multiple of N" stuff would have been pretty dense if I hadn't already been familiar with modular arithmetic though. I also, before seeing this, thought that discrete log encryption was safe against Shor's algorithm, but it seems that that's precisely what it does! Daaannnngg

If you wanted to make the viewer curious, you acheived that. If you wanted to explain a concept to be understood, you failed.

Dashlane ad disclosure should occur at the beginning of the video, not jury before the ad itself. The video is strongly relevant to internet security so the fact that it was sponsored by an internet security company is extremely relevant and should be made clear before the video begins.

Basically any random dude walking down the street with a quantum computer will be able to see my nudes not far from now… Interesting.

I’m so high right now, and somehow I understood everything.

So if Moore's law holds for quantum computers (number of qubits), which I guess is quite the "if", we've got about 16 years to transition to new types of encryption. That's assuming no better algorithms are discovered in that time.

How long we are from breaking a 64bit encrypted number

So how far are we from developing a quantum computer powerful enough to run this algorithm? If the public info is less than 10 years, several governments are probably already doing it lol. I get the feeling that while development on it at the moment is slow, there only needs to be a few breakthroughs and suddenly "ok don't put anything sensitive on the internet for a few years while we work out quantum cryptography" becomes a thing….

You proved to be of value, I understand next to nothing.

so take a guess, find remainder, run more and more guesses till you hit the same remainder again, subtract the two powers, you now have p

Pretty fine idea.. Meaby we can stop concentrate energy to NAME whole superposition particle and just accept it in sumary we get.. Reverse analysis it is not be possible but what ever we need broke the lock! It is same principle like on linear equation where you can get good sumary by manny way and all is good.. Reverse analysis it is also dificult to get same way.. If you catch my meaning.. We just meaby need neural net do the job without thinking about how mashine make it.. Coz algorithm what will be solve dat problem will be evolving..

So . . . . magic.

Don't you tell me that was math, you just spoke sorcery!

You're lucky I didn't gather a mob of villagers with pitchforks and torches!

Great video, man! 🙂

1:51 By the way the factors for that are: 8623 × 1418 402449 × 491390 470288 920494 907091 × 9 023663 461465 973601 719932 809325 754174 066323 (43 digits)

The single thing that quantum computing provides, better than any other factor, is DATA SECURITY. Just ask the DOD.

My brain exploded.

I understood everything!

Felt Smart, until I start watching this video 🙁

brain fart

Why am I seeing these Calculus and other advanced equations, this is making my YouTube only brain melt!!!

That's why US government, Apple, and other tech giants are buying and/or making quantum computers, to mine our data, nice 😑

pretty much math and physics

too much for me

Making me feel smarter as I'm expecting to get back my (probably bad) college grades in next day or 2

Quantum computers will not break encryption… as they will first be used to make it stronger so that when quantum computers hit the consumer market (if they ever will) the encryption will be strong enough as it is today.

Quantum computers don't break encryption because quantum computers don't exist.

thanks for getting me interested in physics! I will now major in math/physics

Just quantum quantum, superposition, guess, power….. Multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple multiple that's it.

so if i understood you correctly then what you are saying is… what exactly? xD

next video: How Encryption Breaks Quantum Computers, please!

I find it resonant to my discrete maths learning this semester, quite interesting to me.

I understood this video in 1 out of 14 million realities

Does your brain also hurt while trying to grasp this?

whooshCould not understand …. But nice video as you have described it elaborately, useful for the people working in the related field.