NIST Selects HQC as Backup Algorithm for Post-Quantum Encryption

,

NIST has been working for over eight years to develop encryption algorithms that remain secure even against the potential capabilities of future quantum computers.

Advertisements

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has chosen HQC as a backup encryption algorithm to safeguard data against potential quantum computing threats. This selection follows the agency’s 2024 standardization of ML-KEM, which remains the primary choice for general encryption. HQC, built on different mathematical principles than ML-KEM, provides an alternative in case vulnerabilities are discovered in the current standard. A draft standard incorporating HQC is expected in 2026, with finalization anticipated in 2027.

NIST has been working for over eight years to develop encryption algorithms that remain secure even against the potential capabilities of future quantum computers. While current encryption methods protect sensitive data such as financial records and national security information, quantum computers could eventually break these defenses. ML-KEM, based on structured lattices, was selected as the core of the new encryption standard, but HQC, which uses error-correcting codes, will serve as a backup. Although HQC requires more computing resources, its reliability and distinct mathematical foundation make it a strong alternative.

The selection of HQC comes as part of NIST’s ongoing Post-Quantum Cryptography project, which has standardized multiple encryption and digital signature algorithms to future-proof cybersecurity systems. HQC is the only algorithm from NIST’s fourth round of candidates to be approved for standardization. A draft standard is expected in about a year, followed by a 90-day public comment period before final approval in 2027.

In addition to selecting HQC, NIST has published draft guidance for implementing key encapsulation mechanisms (KEMs), including both HQC and ML-KEM. KEMs are used to establish secure communications over public networks. The draft guidance, titled Recommendations for Key Encapsulation Mechanisms (NIST Special Publication 800-227), provides best practices for implementing these encryption methods. NIST also hosted a virtual workshop on KEMs in February and accepted public comments on the draft until March 7, 2025.

The finalized encryption standards, including ML-KEM (FIPS 203) and digital signature standards FIPS 204 and FIPS 205, are already in use, with organizations integrating them into their systems. A forthcoming standard, FIPS 206, will address digital signatures based on the FALCON algorithm. These measures aim to ensure long-term data security in an era where quantum computing could disrupt current cryptographic protections.

Join 16 other subscribers

Advertisements

audible - now streaming: podcasts, originals, and more. Start your free trial.

Advertisements

Amazon business - everything you love about amazon. for work - learn more

Advertisement

Advertisements

Trending Topics

AI Business Consumer cyber-security cybersecurity Email Gaming Government Hacking Home Innovation Malware Mobile Phishing Privacy Scams security Shopping technology Vulnerabilities

More News

Sometimes Life Bites Like a Gator, Sometimes You Bite Back

Today starts a new chapter in my life, so also comes a new chapter for the Cyber News Gator.

Podcast Corner

Cybersecurity Awesomeness Podcast – Episode 177 – Cybersecurity Awesomeness Podcast

In this episode of the Cybersecurity Awesomeness Podcast, host Chris Steffen is joined by his Enterprise Management Associates colleague and lead data analytics analyst Herb Blecher, for a deep dive into data integrity, semantics, and AI-driven governance.Steffen and Blecher explore how modern organizations are leveraging AI to aggregate and report data for Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC) audits. However, they highlight a critical distinction: the underlying data is rarely flawed; rather, the AI model training, semantic definitions, and data aggregation often introduce dangerous inaccuracies—ranging from misinterpreted definitions (like the multifaceted meanings of "revenue") to the accidental exposure of sensitive PII. Blecher emphasizes that achieving reliable AI outcomes requires returning to fundamentals such as strict semantics, data lineage, and contextual guardrails. Ultimately, the duo agrees that while AI is a powerful force multiplier for operations and security orchestration, organizations must maintain rigorous validation and treat AI outputs with active skepticism to avoid costly fiduciary and operational missteps.

Discover more from Cyber News Gator

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Discover more from Cyber News Gator

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading