Google released a blog post on steps required to take ASAP, so that we are prepared for when quantum computers are readily available to crack current encryption [1]. I read it after I saw a video talking about this post, which as one might expect, was a bit alarmist. However, it is a real #cybersec #threat, and I've seen other sources mention, that #threatactors are starting to gather #encrypted #data in the expectation to readily #decrypt it in the near future. /1

[1] https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/technology/safety-security/the-quantum-era-is-coming-are-we-ready-to-secure-it/

The quantum era is coming. Are we ready to secure it?

Google shares an update on its work and suggestions for how policymakers can help everyone be more secure in the Quantum Era.

Google

However, I can't help but feel sceptical about the article posted. It sounds too much like a #salesPitch. I'm especially bothered by point 4 ‐ #cloudFirst. #CloudServices have plenty of sensible #useCases. However, for many businesses, the number drops radically once #BusinessObjectives are considered. #DataStorage is often best done #onprem, in many cases, purely from a financial perspective [1]. Google seems to hint at this approach introducing security issues. /2

[1] https://thenewstack.io/cloud-vs-on-prem-comparing-long-term-costs/

Cloud vs. On-Prem: Comparing Long-Term Costs

The convenience of cloud services is undeniable, but companies need to rethink if it’s financially sound long-term.

The New Stack
#cybersec seems to be a valid argument, on first impression. But I don't buy it. The approach seems to inteoduce with every solved problem, a slew of new ones. The #targetsurface seems to be increased, instead of decreased. A fractured system is harder to breach than a single entity. While I can imagine sub-systems mitigating these issues, the history of the industry doesn't awaken confidence. Add to that the issue of inivitably creating monopolies. /3