Mediaboss Marketing

Ilana Wisby is the CEO of Oxford Quantum Computing, a spin-out from the University of Oxford in the UK.

A startup in the UK is now offering cloud-based access to its own superconducting quantum computer but with a twist that it hopes could one day help it compete against the processors developed by quantum giants such as IBM and Google.

Oxford Quantum Circuits (OQC), a startup that spun out of the University of Oxford, is approaching superconducting quantum computing slightly differently. Leading superconducting quantum systems are typically built in a two-dimensional plane, with each qubit acting like a unit cell that requires intricate wiring for controls and measurements. Increasing the number of qubits means increasing the amount of wiring and on a 2D plane, this comes with a higher risk of creating environmental noise that can damage the quality of the system.

Instead, OQC's researchers use a three-dimensional architecture that moves the control and measurement wiring out of plane. With key componentry off-chip, says OQC, the superconducting quantum processor is a more flexible and engineerable system.

SEE: Building the bionic brain (free PDF) (TechRepublic)

Dubbed the "Coaxmon," this new design approach ultimately has the potential to make it is easier to scale up the number of qubits on the processor without losing coherence, the company said.

"The Coaxmon was designed from principle to meet some of the underlying scaling challenges with superconducting technologies," Ilana Wisby, the CEO of OQC, tells ZDNet. "We've taken all of that wiring which is a really big element to reducing the power of what we can do with a processor off the chip, meaning that the Coaxmon is inherently a lot more scalable."

According to Wisby, the 3D architecture means that it is possible to increase the qubit count on the processor without resorting to complex fabrication steps for extra wiring, and without running the risk of reducing the system's coherence.

Despite the promising pitch, the quantum computer that OQC has just brought online, called Sophia, is only four qubits strong. In comparison, IBM's current quantum processor can support 65 qubits, and the company is working towards launching a 127-qubit system by the end of the year.

Even then, IBM's quantum computer won't be bringing any significant business value for users: quantum technologies are not expected to start showing any real-world usefulness until they are capable of supporting at least 1,000 qubits. In that light, OQC's new quantum computer still seems to have some way to go before it can compete against the services offered by some of the largest corporations dominating the quantum ecosystem.

But Wisby explains that this is just the start. As a University of Oxford spinout, she says, OQC has until recently mostly developed in the context of university labs, where cost efficiency was key and minds were focused on proving the fundamentals of the technology.

In the last year, however, OQC built and opened its own quantum lab, a facility fitted with all of the cryogenic equipment, cleanrooms, power and data supplies, ducted fume cupboards and other exotic quantum essentials that are necessary to building up a quantum system.

Sophia's low qubit count is, therefore, a business problem rather than a technology one, argues Wisby. "But setting up our own independent commercial lab has marked a moment of independence for the company," she says.

"It's only really now that we've changed our company goals to proving the business model, which obviously has more focus on scaling the full system."

The long-term goal, she assures, is to build a universal, fault-tolerant quantum computer an objective that aligns with that of the largest tech giants currently developing quantum technologies.

Of course, there remain many obstacles to scaling. While increasing the number of qubits in the processor is a challenge in itself, it is also key to ensure that the overall system's support infrastructure and architecture can grow in parallel. OQC, therefore, has secured partnerships with companies like Oxford Instruments to start thinking about the future iterations of Sophia.

For now, OQC is focusing on attracting customers to its brand-new cloud service, which it has just launched to provide customers with access to Sophia via a private cloud.

OQC has now invited businesses to join the company's beta list, to test how they could experiment with new quantum approaches. With only four qubits, however, the scope of potential applications will remain very limited.

Among those already signed up, fellow UK-based quantum computing company Cambridge Quantum is already planning to test Sophia with its IronBridge platform a cybersecurity service that leverages the unpredictability of quantum computers to generate un-hackable cryptographic keys.

Wisby also points to a long-standing partnership with software company Riverlane, which has already been using OQC's quantum computer to run a chemical simulation algorithm names alpha-VQE.

Riverlane and OQC have also been working together todevelop a quantum operating system, Deltaflow.OS,which would allow the same quantum software to run on different types of quantum computing hardware.

Read more here:
This quantum computer with a 3D chip is heading into the cloud - ZDNet

LONDON and CAMBRIDGE, England, July 13, 2021 Rigetti UK announced today it will partner with Riverlane and Astex Pharmaceuticals to develop an integrated application for simulating molecular systems using Rigetti Quantum Cloud Services, paving the way for a commercial application that could transform drug discovery in pharmaceutical R&D.

Our consortium brings together a complete quantum supply chain from hardware to end-user allowing us to develop a tailor-made solution to address a problem of real value to the pharmaceutical sector, says Mandy Birch, SVP of Technology Partnerships at Rigetti. This project lays the groundwork for the commercial application of Rigetti Quantum Cloud Services in the pharmaceutical industry.

The average cost of discovering a new drug and bringing it to market has tripled since 2010, reaching almost $3bn in 2018. However, soaring R&D costs have not translated into shorter times to market or higher numbers of newly approved drugs.

We want to solve this problem by using quantum computers to speed up the process of drug discovery, says Chris Murray, SVP Discovery Technology at Astex. Quantum computers provide a fundamentally different approach that could enable pharmaceutical companies to identify, screen, and simulate new drugs rather than using expensive, trial-and-error approaches in the laboratory.

To design more efficient drugs and shorten the time to market, researchers rely on advanced computational methods to model molecular structures and the interactions with their targets. While classical computers are limited to modelling simple structures, quantum computers have the potential to model more complex systems that could drastically improve the drug discovery process. However, todays quantum computers remain too noisy for results to evolve past proof-of-concept studies.

Building on previous work with Astex, our collaboration aims to overcome this technological barrier and address a real business need for the pharmaceutical sector, says Riverlane CEO Steve Brierley. The project will leverage Riverlanes algorithm expertise and existing technology for high-speed, low-latency processing on quantum computers using Rigettis commercially available quantum systems. The team will also develop error mitigation software to help optimise the performance of the hardware architecture, which they expect to result in up to a threefold reduction in errors and runtime improvements of up to 40x. This is an important first step in improving the performance of quantum computers so that they can solve commercially relevant problems, Brierley adds.

Science Minister Amanda Solloway says, The UK has bold ambitions to be the worlds first quantum-ready economy, harnessing the transformative capabilities of the technology to tackle global challenges such as climate change and disease outbreak.

This government-backed partnership will explore how the power of quantum could help boost drug discovery, with the aim of shortening the time it takes potentially life-saving drugs to transfer from lab to market, all while cementing the UKs status as a science superpower.

The 18-month feasibility study is facilitated by a grant through the Quantum Challenge at UK Research and Innovation (UKRI). Rigetti UK has previously received funding from UKRI to develop the first commercially available quantum computer in the UK. Riverlane has also received funding from UKRI to develop an operating system that makes quantum software portable across qubit technologies.

About Rigetti UK

Rigetti UK Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Rigetti Computing, based in Berkeley, California. Rigetti builds superconducting quantum computing systems and delivers access to them over the cloud. These systems are optimized for integration with existing computing infrastructure and tailored to support the development of practical software and applications. Learn more at rigetti.com.

About Riverlane

Riverlane builds ground-breaking software to unleash the power of quantum computers. Backed by leading venture-capital funds and the University of Cambridge, it develops software that transforms quantum computers from experimental technology into commercial products. Learn more at riverlane.com.

About Astex

Astex is a leader in innovative drug discovery and development, committed to the fight against cancer and diseases of the central nervous system. Astex is developing a proprietary pipeline of novel therapies and has a number of partnered products being developed under collaborations with leading pharmaceutical companies. Astex is a wholly owned subsidiary of Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., based in Tokyo, Japan.

For more information about Astex Pharmaceuticals, please visit https://astx.comFor more information about Otsuka Pharmaceutical, please visit http://www.otsuka.co.jp/en/

Source: Rigetti UK

Read this article:
Rigetti Computing Partners with Riverlane, Astex Pharmaceuticals on Quantum Computing for Drug Discovery - HPCwire

Making Encryption Harder, Better, Faster and Stronger

In response, the industry is advancing encryption on several fronts. Some efforts are focused on increasing key sizes to protect against brute-force decryption. Other efforts are looking at new cryptographic algorithms. For example, the National Institute of Standards and Technology isevaluating a next-generation public key algorithm intended to be quantum safe.

The trouble is that most quantum-safe algorithms arent efficient in classical computer architectures. To address this problem, the industry is focused on developing accelerators to speed up algorithms on x86 platforms.

A third area of research ishomomorphic encryption, an amazing concept that allows users to perform calculations on encrypted data without first decrypting it. So, an analyst who needs to can query a database containing classified information without having to ask an analyst with higher clearance to access the data or request that the data be declassified.

A big advantage of homomorphic encryption is that it protects data in all its states at rest (stored on a hard drive), in motion (transmitted across a network) or in use (while in computer memory). Another boon is that its quantum safe, because its based on some of the same math as quantum computing.

A downside is that homomorphic encryption performs very poorly on traditional computers, because its not designed to work with them. The industry is collaborating to develop x86-style instructions to make these new cryptosystems operate at cloud speeds. Practical applications are still a few years away, but were confident well get there.

EXPLORE:How can agencies combat encrypted attacks on government traffic?

In the interim, a new encryption capability has emerged that organizations can take advantage of right now:confidential computing. Confidential computing safeguards data while its being acted upon in computer memory; for example, while a user is conducting analytics on a database.

Confidential computing works by having the CPU reserve a section of memory as a secure enclave, encrypting the memory in the enclave with a key unique to the CPU. Data and application code placed in the enclave can be decrypted only within that enclave, on that CPU. Even if attackers gained root access to the system, they wouldnt be able to read the data.

With the latest generation of computer processors, a two-CPU server can create a 1 terabyte enclave. That enables organizations to place an entire database or transaction server inside the enclave.

The functionality is now being extended with the ability to encrypt all of a computers memory with minimal impact on performance. Total memory encryption uses a platform-specific encryption key thats randomly derived each time the system is booted up. When the computer is turned off, the key goes away. So even if cybercriminals stole the CPU, they wouldnt be able to access the memory.

Confidential computing transforms the way organizations approach security in the cloud, because they no longer have to implicitly trust the cloud provider. Instead, they can protect their data while its in use, even though its being hosted by a third party.

One major cloud provider already offers a confidential computing service to the federal government, and more will surely follow. Agencies can now build enclave-based applications to protect data in use in a dedicated cloud that meets government security and compliance requirements.

The need for strong data encryption wont go away, and the encryption challenges will only increase as quantum computing emerges over the next several years. In the meantime, innovative new encryption capabilities are delivering tighter cybersecurity to agencies today, and the industry is investing in the next generation of cryptosystems to protect government information for the next 25 years.

Here is the original post:
The Future of Data Encryption: What You Need to Know Now - FedTech Magazine

6 July 2021

Quantum Blockchain Technologies Plc(QBT or the Company)

QBT To Use D-Waves Quantum Technologies In Cryptography Algorithms

Quantum Blockchain Technologies Plc (AIM: QBT), the UK Quantum Computing Cryptography and Artificial Intelligence research and development (R&D) and investment company, listed on the London Stock Exchanges AIM market, announces it will use the Leap quantum cloud service from D-Wave Systems Inc., the leader in quantum computing systems, software and services, to develop cryptography algorithms for crypto currency mining.

QBT will now be able to access D-Waves quantum-classical hybrid solvers, which leverage both quantum solutions and best-in-class classical algorithms to run large-scale business-critical problems. With real-time access to quantum computers via the cloud, QBT aims to transform classic computing cryptography algorithms, such as the one used for Bitcoin mining, in quantum computations, or quantum-classic hybrid computations.

QBTs quantum computing team is working on the Leap platform with the goal to exploit the speed of quantum computations, which can be, under the appropriate conditions, several order of magnitudes faster than a classic computer.

D-Waves new quantum computer, Advantage, includes more than 5,000 qubits and 15-way qubit connectivity. More qubits and richer connectivity provide programmers and businesses access to a larger, denser, and more powerful graph for building commercial quantum applications.

The hybrid solver services in the Leap platform combine the power of Advantage with classical resources, enabling businesses and developers to build, run and solve complex, large-scale business-critical problems with up to 1 million variables.

QBT has already created a team, which has started working on the conversion of optimised cryptographic algorithms, in order to make them suitable to run on D-Waves quantum system and quantum hybrid solvers.

Francesco Gardin, CEO and Executive Chairman of QBT, commented, QBT is delighted to work with the D-Wave team, which we believe will provide us with an alternative approach to the computation of cryptographic algorithms. We have selected what we believe is a major international consolidated player in the quantum computing market and we look forward to working with them during the first phase of the project. In particular, we are excited to have the benefit of utilising D-Waves Advantage quantum processor, with more than 5,000 qubits where we intend to develop our optimised cryptographic algorithms.

Story continues

Alan Baratz, CEO of D-Wave Systems Inc., commented, Bringing quantum computing to the world requires a robust ecosystem of developers and researchers, as well as forward-thinking businesses that are committed to building practical and applied quantum computing applications. QBT is a leader in developing new and disruptive approaches to blockchain technology an important innovation with the power to change the world.

For more information on D-Wave, please go to: https://www.dwavesys.com/quantum-computing

-ends-

For further information please contact:

Quantum Blockchain Technologies PlcFrancesco Gardin, CEO and Executive Chairman

+39 335 296573

SP Angel Corporate Finance(Nominated Adviser & Broker)Jeff Keating

+44 (0)20 3470 0470

Leander (Financial PR)Christian Taylor-Wilkinson

+44 (0) 7795 168 157

About Quantum Blockchain Technologies (AIM: QBT)

Quantums R&D focus is on Cryptography and AI using Quantum Computing, bringing together the most advanced classic computing technology, along with quantum computing and AI deep learning, to develop, among other things, a new and disruptive approach to blockchain technology, which includes cryptocurrencies mining and other advanced blockchain applications.

The Company has set up a team of international experts in the above sectors, as well as a computing infrastructure to support the development of the most advanced innovative solution based on the front-line IT technologies.

For further information, please visit, http://www.quantumblockchaintechnologies.co.uk

Read this article:
Quantum Blockchain Technologies Plc - Working with D-Wave Systems - Yahoo Finance UK

Feature Do the laws of physics trump mathematical complexity, or is Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) nothing more than 21st-century enterprise encryption snake oil? The number of QKD news headlines that have included unhackable, uncrackable or unbreakable could certainly lead you towards the former conclusion.

However, we at The Reg are unrelenting sceptics for our sins and take all such claims with a bulk-buy bag of Saxa. What this correspondent is not, however, is a physicist nor a mathematician, let alone a quantum cryptography expert. Thankfully, I know several people who are, so I asked them the difficult questions. Here's how those conversations went.

I can tell you what QKD isn't, and that's quantum cryptography. Instead, as the name suggests, it's just the part that deals with the exchange of encryption keys.

As defined by the creators of the first Quantum key distribution (QKD) protocol, (Bennett and Brassard, 1984) it is a method to solve the problem of the need to distribute secret keys among distant Alice and Bobs in order for cryptography to work. The way QKD solves this problem is by using quantum communication. "It relies on the fact that any attempt of an adversary to wiretap the communication would, by the laws of quantum mechanics, inevitably introduce disturbances which can be detected."

Quantum security expert, mathematician and security researcher Dr Mark Carney explains there "are a few fundamental requirements for QKD to work between Alice (A) and Bob (B), these being a quantum key exchange protocol to guarantee the key exchange has a level of security, a quantum and classical channel between A and B, and the relevant hardware and control software for A and B to enact the protocol we started with."

If you are the diagrammatical type, there's a nifty if nerdy explanatory one here.

It's kind of a given that, in and of themselves, quantum key exchange protocols are primarily very secure, as Dr Carney says most are derived from either BB84 (said QKD protocol of Bennett and Brassard, 1984) or E91 (Eckert, 1991) and sometimes a mixture of the two.

"They've had a lot of scrutiny, but they are generally considered to be solid protocols," Dr Carney says, "and when you see people claiming that 'quantum key exchange is totally secure and unhackable' there are a few things that are meant: that the key length is good (at least 256 bits), the protocol can detect someone eavesdropping on the quantum channel and the entropy of the system gives unpredictable keys, and the use of quantum states to encode these means they are tamper-evident."

So, if the protocol is accepted as secure, where do the snake oil claims enter the equation? According to Dr Carney, it's in the implementation where things start to get very sticky.

"We all know that hardware, firmware, and software have bugs even the most well researched, well assessed, widely hacked pieces of tech such as the smartphone regularly has bug updates, security fixes, and emergency patches. Bug-free code is hard, and it shouldn't be considered that the control systems for QKD are any different," Carney insists.

In other words, it's all well and good having a perfected quantum protocol, but if someone can do memory analysis on A or B's systems, then your "super secure" key can get pwned. "It's monumentally naive in my view that the companies producing QKD tech don't take this head on," Dr Carney concludes. "Hiding behind 'magic quantum woo-woo security' is only going to go so far before people start realising."

Professor Rob Young, director of the Quantum Technology Centre at Lancaster University, agrees that there is a gap between an ideal QKD implementation and a real system, as putting the theory into practice isn't easy without making compromises.

QKD connections can be blocked using a DDoS attack as simple as using a pneumatic drill in the vicinity of the cable

"When you generate the states to send from the transmitter," he explains, "errors are made, and detecting them at the receiver efficiently is challenging. Security proofs typically rely on a long list of often unmet assumptions in the real world."

Then there are the hardware limitations, with most commercially implemented QKD systems using a discrete-state protocol sending single photons down low-loss fibres. "Photons can travel a surprising distance before being absorbed, but it means that the data exchange rate falls off exponentially with distance," Young says.

"Nodes in networks need to be trusted currently, as we can't practically relay or switch quantum channels without trusting the nodes. Solutions to these problems are in development, but they could be years away from commercial implementation."

This lack of quantum repeaters is a red flag, according to Duncan Jones, head of Quantum Cybersecurity at Cambridge Quantum, who warns that "trusted repeaters" are not the same thing. "In most cases this simply means a trusted box which reads the key material from one fibre cable and re-transmits it down another. This is not a quantum-safe approach and negates the security benefits of QKD."

Then there's the motorway junction conundrum. Over to Andersen Cheng, CEO at Post-Quantum, to explain. Cheng points to problems such as QKD only telling you that a person-in-the-middle attack has happened, with photons disturbed because of the interception, but not where that attack is taking place or how many attacks are happening.

"If someone is going to put a tap along your 150km high-grade clear fibre-optic cable, how are you going to locate and weed out those taps quickly?" Cheng asks.

What if an attacker locates your cable grid and cuts a cable off? Where is the contingency for redundancy to ensure no disruption? This is where the motorway junction conundrum comes in.

"QKD is like two junctions of a motorway," Cheng explains. "You know car accidents are happening because the road surface is being attacked, but you do not know how many accidents have happened or where or who the culprit is, so you cannot go and kick the offenders out and patch up the road surface."

This all comes to the fore when Anderson insists: "QKD connections can be blocked using a DDoS attack as simple as using a pneumatic drill in the vicinity of the cable."

Sally Epstein, head of Strategic Technology at Cambridge Consultants, throws a couple of pertinent questions into the "ask any QKD vendor" ring.

Quantum-safe cryptography, coupled with verifiable quantum key generation, is an excellent approach to the same problem and works perfectly today

"1. Supply chain: There is a much greater potential for well-funded bad actors to get into the supply chain. How do they manage their supply chain security?

"2. Human fallibility: There are almost certainly exploitable weaknesses in the control software, optical sub-assemblies, electronic, firmware, etc. What penetration testing has the supplier conducted in terms of software and hardware?"

Professor Young thinks that QKD currently offers little return on investment for your average enterprise. "QKD can distribute keys with provable security metrics, but current systems are expensive, slow and difficult to implement," he says.

As has already been pointed out, security proofs are generally based on ideal cases without taking the actual physical implementation into account. This, Young says, "troubles the central premise of using QKD in the first place."

However, he doesn't think that the limitations are fundamental and sees an exciting future for the technology.

Because QKD technology is still maturing, and keys can only be sent across relatively short distances using dedicated fibre-optic cables, Jones argues that "only the biggest enterprises and telcos should be spending any money on researching this technology today."

Not least, he says, because the problems QKD solves are equally well addressed through different means. "Quantum-safe cryptography, coupled with verifiable quantum key generation, is an excellent approach to the same problem and works perfectly today," Jones concludes.

Professor Andrew Lord, head of Optical Network Research at BT, has a less pessimistic outlook.

"Our trial with NCC in Bristol illustrates a client with a need to transmit data which should remain secure for many years into the future," Lord told The Reg. "QKD is attractive here because it provides security against the 'tap now, decrypt later' risk, where data could be stored and decrypted when a quantum computer becomes available."

The UK's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has gone on the record to state it does not endorse the use of QKD for any government or military application, and the National Security Agency (NSA) in the US has reached the same conclusion.

Jones of Cambridge Quantum says he completely agrees with the NCSC/NSA perspectives because the "first generation of quantum security technologies has failed to deliver tangible benefits for commercial or government applications."

Young goes further: "Both NCSC and NSA echo the views of all serious cryptographers with regards to QKD, and I am in complete agreement with them."

So what needs to change to make QKD solutions relevant to enterprises in the real world? Lord admits that the specialised hardware requirements of QKD does mean it won't be the best solution for all use cases, but foresees "photonic-chip based QKD ultimately bringing the price down to a point where it can be integrated into standard optical transmission equipment."

Dr Carney adds: "In closing, all this leaves us with the biggest misunderstanding about QKD vs classical key exchange; in classical key exchange the mathematics that makes Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman Ephemeral (ECDHE) or your favourite Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) key exchange secure is distinct and independent of the physical channel (the classical channel) that is being used for the protocol.

"On a QKD system, the mathematics is in some way intrinsically, and necessarily, linked to the actual physicality of the system. This situation is unavoidable, and we would do well to design for and around it."

Here is the original post:
Quantum Key Distribution: Is it as secure as claimed and what can it offer the enterprise? - The Register