Talk to us
Whether you're buying, selling, partnering, or investing — pick what fits and our team will get back to you within one business day.
A real human, fast
Someone on our team replies within one business day — no bots, no ticket queue.
Routed to the right team
Buying, selling, partnering, or investing — you reach the people who can actually help.
Independent & unbiased
No pushy sales. Just honest guidance grounded in the ecosystem.
Tailored to your context
Tell us what you need and we shape the next steps around it.
Who are you? Pick the option that fits best.
A quantum computer that can break today’s encryption does not exist yet — and that is precisely why your data is at risk right now. "Harvest now, decrypt later" is the quiet cybersecurity threat every technology leader should be planning for in 2026.
The short version: A quantum computer powerful enough to break today's encryption does not exist yet — but attackers are not waiting for it. Under "harvest now, decrypt later," they steal encrypted data today and store it to decrypt once quantum computers mature. NIST finalized post-quantum encryption standards in August 2024, the NSA has set a 2030 migration deadline for national security systems, and experts expect today's public-key crypto retired by 2035. For any data that must stay secret into the 2030s, the clock started years ago. The fix is not panic — it is a cryptographic inventory, crypto-agility, and a hybrid migration you begin now.
Here is the paradox that makes quantum a strange kind of security threat: the weapon that breaks your encryption may be a decade away, yet your data is exposed today. The reason is a patient, cheap, and entirely feasible strategy that adversaries are already running — and most companies have not even started planning for it.
Harvest now, decrypt later (HNDL, sometimes "store now, decrypt later") is exactly what it sounds like. An adversary captures encrypted data today — intercepted network traffic, exfiltrated archives, backups — and simply stores it. They cannot read it yet. They are betting that a future quantum computer will let them decrypt it later. It costs them little now, and the payoff is a treasure trove of secrets whenever the technology catches up.
The unsettling implication: the breach can happen in two acts. The theft is present tense; the decryption is future tense. Any secret with a long shelf life — trade secrets, source code, health records, financials, government archives, encryption keys themselves — is a target the moment it leaves your walls, even if no one can read it for years.
The instinct is to file this under "future problem." Smart technology leaders know it is a today problem, and there is a simple risk test that proves it: Mosca's inequality, from cryptographer Michele Mosca. It says you are in trouble if:
X + Y > Z, where X = how long your data must stay secret, Y = how long your migration to quantum-safe crypto will take, and Z = the years until a quantum computer can break today's encryption.
Do the math on real data. If a contract or medical record must stay confidential for 15 years (X), and a cryptographic migration across a large organization takes 5–7 years (Y), then X + Y is already past 2035 — the horizon by which NIST expects today's public-key algorithms retired. If Z lands anywhere in that window, you have already run out of time for that data. The theorem is not fear-mongering; it is arithmetic. And for long-lived secrets, the arithmetic says start now.
Quantum computing does not break all encryption. It breaks a specific, load-bearing kind. Today's internet relies on public-key cryptography — RSA and elliptic-curve cryptography (ECC) — for key exchange and digital signatures. Their security rests on math problems (factoring large numbers, discrete logarithms) that classical computers cannot solve quickly. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer running Shor's algorithm can. That single capability would unravel the public-key crypto securing web traffic, VPNs, software signing, and much of digital identity.
Symmetric encryption (like AES) is far more resilient — it mostly just needs longer keys. The urgent, wholesale replacement is on the public-key side, and it touches almost everything: TLS certificates, code signing, secure messaging, and the authentication systems that verify who is who.
The good news is that the fix already exists and runs on ordinary hardware. Post-quantum cryptography (PQC) is a new class of algorithms designed to resist both classical and quantum attacks — no quantum computer required to use them. After an eight-year global competition, NIST finalized its first standards in August 2024:
The recommended path during transition is hybrid: run a post-quantum algorithm alongside a classical one, so you are protected even if a new PQC scheme has an undiscovered flaw. This is supply-chain-grade caution applied to cryptography.
This is no longer theoretical. The NSA's CNSA 2.0 sets 2030 as the mandatory migration deadline for national security systems. NIST expects the vulnerable public-key algorithms retired by 2035. Cloudflare and Google have publicly targeted around 2029, and post-quantum key exchange is already live in major browsers and networks. The message from the front-runners is consistent: begin a cryptographic inventory now, and start hybrid deployments within the next 12 to 18 months.
You do not need to hand-roll cryptography. You need a plan and the right questions:
Opinion, clearly labeled. Post-quantum feels like a problem you can safely ignore, because the scary machine is not here yet. That intuition is exactly the trap. Every other cybersecurity threat punishes you at the moment of attack; this one punishes you for what you failed to do years earlier, because harvest-now-decrypt-later collapses the timeline. The organizations that treat 2035 as "later" will discover that "later" was a decision they had to make in 2026. The 1% do not gamble on Q-Day's date — they build crypto-agility so it does not matter when it arrives. This is less a technology project than a discipline: know your crypto, keep it swappable, and protect your long-lived secrets before someone quietly copies them.
Harvest now, decrypt later (HNDL) is an attack strategy where adversaries capture and store encrypted data today — even though they cannot read it yet — betting that a future quantum computer will decrypt it. It turns today's intercepted traffic and stolen archives into tomorrow's breach. Any data that must stay secret for years is already at risk, because the theft can happen now and the decryption later.
No one knows the exact date — often called "Q-Day" — but credible estimates cluster in the 2030s. That is why the deadlines matter more than the prediction: the NSA requires National Security Systems to migrate by 2030, NIST expects today's public-key algorithms retired by 2035, and firms like Cloudflare and Google have targeted around 2029. The uncertainty is the point: you have to be ready before the computer exists, not after.
Post-quantum cryptography (PQC), also called quantum-safe or quantum-resistant cryptography, is a new generation of encryption algorithms designed to resist attacks from both classical and quantum computers. It runs on today's ordinary hardware — you do not need a quantum computer to use it. PQC replaces the public-key algorithms (like RSA and elliptic-curve) that a quantum computer could break.
In August 2024, NIST published its first three post-quantum standards: FIPS 203 (ML-KEM, for key exchange, based on CRYSTALS-Kyber), FIPS 204 (ML-DSA, for digital signatures, based on CRYSTALS-Dilithium), and FIPS 205 (SLH-DSA, a hash-based signature scheme). These are the vetted, standardized algorithms organizations should adopt, typically in hybrid mode alongside classical cryptography during the transition.
Mosca's theorem (or Mosca's inequality), from cryptographer Michele Mosca, is a simple risk test: if X (how long your data must stay secret) plus Y (how long it takes you to migrate to quantum-safe crypto) is greater than Z (the years until a quantum computer can break today's encryption), you are already out of time. For data with long confidentiality lifespans, X + Y frequently exceeds Z today — which is why experts say to start now.
Start with a cryptographic inventory: find everywhere you use vulnerable public-key cryptography — in apps, APIs, VPNs, certificates, and vendors. Then build crypto-agility (the ability to swap algorithms without re-architecting), prioritize data with long secrecy requirements, begin hybrid post-quantum deployments in the next 12 to 18 months, and add post-quantum readiness to your vendor and procurement questions. You are managing a multi-year migration, so the first step is knowing what you have.
Yes, mostly through your vendors and the platforms you use. You are unlikely to hand-implement PQC, but your cloud providers, browsers, VPNs, and SaaS tools will migrate — and you should ask them when. If you hold data that must stay confidential into the 2030s (contracts, health records, IP, financials), the harvest-now-decrypt-later risk applies to you regardless of size. Crypto-agility and good vendor questions are the practical response.
The decryption is not here yet — but the theft can be. Harvest now, decrypt later means long-lived secrets you transmit or store today can be captured now and read once quantum computers mature. So the threat to long-confidentiality data is effectively present tense, even though the quantum computer that unlocks it is future tense. That asymmetry is exactly why migration cannot wait for Q-Day.
Tags
The 1% Stack
Saaskart's media & intelligence series for software buyers, founders, and operators — opinionated takes on SaaS, AI agents, and the stacks that separate the 1% from everyone else.
Explore thousands of vetted tools, AI agents, and service providers on Saaskart — compare features, pricing, and real buyer reviews in one place.
