

Huh, interesting; that’s a good question. I’m not actually sure about that; it’d be a good thing for me to dig into more. Thanks for the thought!


Huh, interesting; that’s a good question. I’m not actually sure about that; it’d be a good thing for me to dig into more. Thanks for the thought!


I mean, they specifically point to post-quantum cryptography and advise people to move towards it in the article:
Google said: “We’ve adjusted our threat model to prioritise post-quantum cryptography migration for authentication services – an important component of online security and digital signature migrations. We recommend that other engineering teams follow suit.”
The issue here is not that there aren’t solutions; it’s that organizations are not interested in taking the time and effort to move towards them. I’ve been beating this particular drum at my org for about a year, and I’ve gotten zero traction. This is a concern because moving to New encryption means taking all the data you’ve got, decrypting it, and re-encrypting it. That’s not fast when you’re talking hundreds of terabytes.


One place I’m familiar with actually just deidentifies data when they say they delete it. They also have ways to re-identify if needed.


“plotting” != “conducting”
Did you drop a zero? The number I was taught when I was studying Japanese in college decades ago was 48,902. I don’t know why it stuck in my head so hard, but it did.
I found kanji to be both difficult and fascinating. It’s tempting to just focus on them as a writing system, but I think the readings are at least as important.