{"id":3177,"date":"2025-01-27T05:55:27","date_gmt":"2025-01-27T13:55:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/?p=3177"},"modified":"2025-01-27T05:55:28","modified_gmt":"2025-01-27T13:55:28","slug":"googles-new-quantum-chip-cant-break-cryptography","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/googles-new-quantum-chip-cant-break-cryptography\/","title":{"rendered":"Google\u2019s new quantum chip can\u2019t break cryptography"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

For many tech enthusiasts, quantum computing is a fascinating subject. Although it\u2019s not quite there yet (and probably won\u2019t be for a long, long time), the potential of using quantum mechanics for performing computation<\/a> is enormous. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

However, not all that potential is positive. One long-held belief about the advent of quantum computing is that it will impact the efficacy of cryptography, the system underpinning SSL encryption online. Is this something the everyday person should be worried about, especially now that Google has made some significant strides with the creation of its new quantum chip?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Google doesn\u2019t seem to think so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What\u2019s the deal with Willow?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Willow is Google\u2019s latest quantum chip. What makes it significant is its reduced error tendencies. While errors are relatively rare on classical computers, according to Microsoft<\/a>, error rates of 1% to 0.1% are typical for current state-of-the-art quantum computers. This could be set to change with the creation of Willow. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Google says<\/a> its Quantum AI division decreased the error rate by using more qubits, as a result solving a key problem quantum research has pursued for the past thirty years. Now that quantum error correction has been cracked, Google says Willow has performed a computation that would take the world\u2019s strongest supercomputer 10 septillion years, which is an unfathomable number that\u2019s older than the universe. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

From that perspective, Willow\u2019s creation is certainly an exciting development, but is still unlikely to impact everyday computer users for a long time. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why can\u2019t Willow break modern cryptography?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Still, people across the Internet have been speculating what this could mean and whether this is the key to making hackers\u2019 jobs easier, putting online encryption at risk, and endangering online infrastructure and people\u2019s financial security.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Google claims it\u2019s not, telling The Verge<\/a> that the Willow chip simply isn\u2019t capable of such a feat, despite its impressive computation power. That\u2019s because you would need a \u201ccryptanalytically relevant quantum computer,\u201d or CRQC to break cryptography. Such a computer would need millions of physical qubits worth of that computing power to crack it. Willow only has 105. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Charina Chou, Google Quantum AI director and COO, said, \u201cEstimates are we\u2019re at least 10 years out from breaking RSA, and that around 4 million physical qubits would be required to do this\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, no need to worry about your SSL certificates just yet. Your online projects will remain safe and secure for the foreseeable future.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

For many tech enthusiasts, quantum computing is a fascinating subject. Although it\u2019s not quite there yet (and probably won\u2019t be for a long, long time), the potential of using quantum mechanics for performing computation is enormous. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3177","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3177","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3177"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3177\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3178,"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3177\/revisions\/3178"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3177"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3177"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ssls.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3177"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}