10
Loading video...
By Jay Prakash
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Quantum security has moved from a distant technical concern to a live infrastructure question.
For years, companies could treat quantum risk as something abstract: important eventually, but too far away to shape today’s infrastructure decisions. That posture is becoming harder to defend. Banks, custodians, payment companies, cloud providers, and digital asset platforms rely on cryptography to protect money, identity, communications, approvals and transaction flows. If the cryptographic foundations of those systems need to change, the migration will be long, technical and operationally sensitive. It makes sense to start early.
The concern around quantum-computing is straightforward. Powerful enough quantum computers could eventually break many of the public-key cryptographic systems used today to secure digital signatures, encrypted communications, identity systems and financial transactions. Institutions protecting high-value assets need to prepare by upgrading to quantum-safe encryption techniques, which can be an arduous process.
Read More on Essays
Related Story
Quantum Readiness Starts With the Infrastructure We Already Have
One complicating factor is that the roadmap to quantum security is still murky. Companies are being told to prepare for quantum risk before the market has fully settled on what quantum-safe infrastructure should look like in practice. Standards are emerging, but many implementation questions remain unresolved. For company executives, that uncertainty makes quantum security easy to postpone.
But that would be a mistake.
The companies investing in quantum security now are giving themselves a head start on one of the most complex infrastructure migrations of the next decade. Early experimentation gives institutions time to understand their cryptographic dependencies, test new architectures, build internal expertise, and avoid being forced into rushed decisions later. Quantum readiness is becoming a competitive advantage, and the institutions that begin now will be better positioned than those that continue to kick the can down the road.
...
Early Experimentation Gives Companies Time to Understand Their Real Cryptographic Dependencies
Most large organizations do not have a clean, complete map of where cryptography sits across their infrastructure.
That is a serious problem. How can you make a system quantum secure, when you don’t fully understand how the system works? Companies need to identify signature schemes, encryption systems, key-management flows, authentication systems, vendor dependencies, cloud services, custody infrastructure, internal tooling and legacy systems. That work sounds basic, but it is rarely simple inside large institutions with years of accumulated software, vendors, integrations and operational workarounds.
The organizations that start early can answer basic but critical questions. Which systems depend on algorithms that may become vulnerable in a quantum era? Which keys protect high-value assets or long-lived sensitive data? Which vendors and partners create downstream exposure? Which systems can be upgraded with limited disruption, and which will require deeper architectural work?
That inventory becomes a strategic asset. It allows companies to separate urgent priorities from lower-risk systems instead of treating quantum migration as one enormous, undifferentiated project.
Early movers will know what they actually need to fix. Late movers may not even know where to begin.
Early Testing Reveals Where Further Development Is Needed
The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has played a central role in this transition. The organization has been steadily evaluating and standardizing post-quantum cryptographic algorithms (new forms of cryptography designed to remain secure even against future quantum computers.) For banks, cloud providers, government agencies and infrastructure companies, NIST provides a reference point for which algorithms are credible enough to begin testing and, eventually, deploying.
That makes NIST’s work an important milestone. But standards alone do not create production-ready infrastructure.
Institutions still need to understand how quantum-safe signatures and encryption work inside real systems. They need to test them against the operational constraints that matter in financial and digital infrastructure: transaction size, latency, cost, approval workflows, key management, custody models, auditability and resilience.
These questions are especially important for institutions that rely on distributed signing and MPC-based custody. In MPC, or multi-party computation, cryptographic keys can be split across multiple parties or systems so no single party holds the full key. This has become an important model for digital asset custody because it reduces single points of failure and supports distributed approval workflows.
Quantum-safe migration has to work with that reality. How do post-quantum signatures affect transaction size and performance? How do they interact with existing MPC custody models? Can they be introduced without undermining distributed approval workflows? Can institutions preserve their existing controls while upgrading the underlying cryptography?
Those answers will only be uncovered through pilots, integration work, failure analysis and practical experimentation.
Early Movers Can Migrate Gradually Instead of Under Pressure
Security migrations are rarely simple software updates. They require testing, audits, compatibility checks, vendor coordination, customer communication, governance approvals and sometimes changes to core infrastructure.
Companies that begin early can run pilots, test hybrid architectures, evaluate performance tradeoffs and phase upgrades into existing product roadmaps. In many cases, the practical path will involve running classical and post-quantum systems in parallel for a period of time, allowing institutions to test new protections without immediately abandoning infrastructure that already secures critical systems. A calculated, phased migration lets companies make careful decisions while the pressure is still manageable.
The worst-case scenario for companies is waiting too long and being forced to replace critical security infrastructure during a crisis, under regulatory scrutiny or after a public failure. Institutions that cannot tolerate downtime or unclear control over keys, approvals, custody or transaction flows should be especially wary of waiting too long.
The migration will be difficult either way. Starting early gives companies more control over how it unfolds.
Customers and Partners Will Reward Visible Quantum-Readiness
Security is increasingly part of commercial due diligence. Enterprises, financial institutions, custodians, exchanges, wallet providers and infrastructure partners are already asked to prove how they manage operational risk.
Quantum risk will become part of that conversation because it affects the systems customers depend on most: identity, transaction approval, communications, custody and data protection. A provider that cannot explain its quantum-readiness plan will look less prepared as the issue moves from specialist circles into boardrooms, procurement processes and regulatory discussions.
Customers and partners will begin asking sharper questions. Does this provider have a quantum-readiness roadmap? Has it inventoried its cryptographic dependencies? Is it testing NIST-standardized post-quantum algorithms? Can it support migration without disrupting existing workflows? Does it understand which systems are most exposed?
Companies that can answer those questions credibly will have an advantage in enterprise sales, institutional partnerships, procurement and regulatory conversations. Customers want to see evidence that critical infrastructure providers are thinking ahead.
Companies That Start Early Will Help Define Market Standard
In emerging infrastructure shifts, the first serious adopters often influence how customers, partners, regulators and vendors define acceptable practice.
Quantum-safe security will follow a similar pattern. Companies experimenting now can help set expectations around migration timelines, hybrid deployment models, custody and signing architecture, risk governance and vendor requirements. Their work will shape what responsible preparation looks like in practice.
Early movers will have a stronger voice because they will have practical experience. That influence can compound over time. In sectors where trust, compliance and infrastructure reliability determine who wins large institutional relationships, the ability to help define the standard is commercially meaningful.
Serious Institutions Have Already Started
Major financial institutions and technology companies are already testing quantum-safe infrastructure in live, high-value contexts.
HSBC, for example, successfully trialed quantum-secure technology for buying and selling tokenized physical gold, framing the pilot as part of its work to protect critical applications from future quantum attacks.
JPMorgan Chase has been developing quantum-safe digital signature capabilities for financial use cases, including digital contracts, transaction authentication, fraud prevention and access to sensitive financial information.
Google is already building post-quantum capabilities into core infrastructure, and Google Cloud announced quantum-safe digital signatures in Cloud KMS.
These efforts are early, but they point in the same direction. Serious institutions are no longer treating quantum security as a theoretical problem. They are testing, learning and preparing their infrastructure for a transition that will take years.
Quantum readiness will not be achieved through a last-minute upgrade. It will require sustained preparation, practical testing and a clear understanding of how cryptography actually supports modern financial and digital infrastructure.
The migration has already started. The question is which institutions will be ready when it accelerates.
Jay Prakash is the founder and CEO of Silence Laboratories, a company developing institutional-grade quantum-safe infrastructure.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines