Long-lived confidential data
Information collected today may still need protection when quantum capabilities change. Review how long confidentiality must last.
Evolext / Quantum readiness
A clearer path to quantum readiness.
Map your cryptography. Understand the risks. Plan your next move.
Practical guidance for SaaS companies and SMEs.
Evolext’s work currently focuses on research, assessment, and controlled laboratory prototypes. Production changes require separately agreed engineering and validation.
01 / Evolext Quantum
Why prepare now?
Plan around the lifetime of your data and systems, rather than a predicted quantum-computer deadline.
Connected dependencies
Cryptography sits inside libraries, identity systems, certificates, protocols, and managed services. Owners and upgrade paths take time to establish.
Migration lead times
Vendor coordination, interoperability testing, and operational change need preparation. Begin with evidence before selecting replacements.
The timing of cryptographically relevant quantum computers remains uncertain. Preparation is a risk-management decision, not a countdown.
Understand threats and data lifetimes ↗02 / Evolext Quantum
Different cryptographic roles. Different decisions.
Quantum threats do not affect every primitive in the same way. Review the algorithm, parameters, protocol, and implementation together.
Read the fundamentals
- Key establishment
- Widely used RSA and elliptic-curve approaches face a threat from sufficiently capable quantum computers. Evaluate supported post-quantum or hybrid protocol options.
- Digital signatures
- RSA and elliptic-curve signatures also need migration planning. Signing, verification, certificates, and long-term trust have distinct constraints.
- Symmetric encryption
- Symmetric encryption remains part of the architecture. Review key strength and the complete construction; an appropriate AES configuration is not replaced by a KEM.
- Hashes
- Review digest length and purpose, including integrity, signatures, and password handling. Quantum search does not make every hash function interchangeable or obsolete.
PQC uses mathematical algorithms on conventional computing platforms. Quantum key distribution uses specialized quantum communication equipment; it is a different approach and is not required for PQC migration.
03 / Evolext Quantum
A practical path, with a decision at every step.
This is the general migration journey. Evolext’s current services cover bounded assessment and controlled prototypes; production work requires separate agreement.
- 01
Inventory
Decision / output
Identify cryptographic use, owners, dependencies, and evidence gaps.
Decision / output
Dependency register with owners and evidence gaps - 02
Prioritize
Decision / output
Review data lifetime, business impact, exposure, and vendor constraints.
Decision / output
Priority list based on data lifetime and business impact - 03
Evaluate
Decision / output
Check standards, protocol support, and implementation maturity for the selected use case.
Decision / output
Option decision record with support constraints - 04
Validate
Decision / output
Test interoperability and operational behavior in an isolated environment.
Decision / output
Compatibility and performance validation evidence - 05
Stage and review
Decision / output
Define monitoring, acceptance criteria, rollback conditions, and remaining risks.
Decision / output
Staged rollout, monitoring, and rollback plan
Illustrative decision record · not client work
- Use case
- A service-to-service connection in a test environment
- Decision gate
- Confirm client, server, library, and protocol support before choosing an option
- Evidence needed
- Interoperability tests, resource measurements, and fallback behavior
- Next decision
- Proceed only if agreed acceptance and rollback criteria are met
04 / Evolext Quantum
Start with a defined scope.
Understand where cryptography is used, identify migration priorities, and test a selected approach through clearly scoped assessment and laboratory work for SaaS companies and SMEs.
Cryptographic inventory
Supported source observations and supplied system evidence; no promise of complete discovery.
Possible deliverables
Suitable inputs
- A named system owner and written authorization for the agreed scope
- Available architecture, dependency, certificate, and vendor information
Possible deliverables
- A scoped cryptographic inventory with source and confidence labels
- An exposure map linking cryptographic use to systems and owners
Readiness assessment
Prioritization and a roadmap; no compliance certification or readiness guarantee.
Possible deliverables
Suitable inputs
- A cryptographic inventory or enough evidence to establish a bounded baseline
- Business owners for critical systems and sensitive data
Possible deliverables
- An evidence-labelled readiness summary and decision register
- A prioritized risk and dependency map
Controlled migration prototypes
Isolated testing of a selected path; production deployment and independent assurance are separately scoped.
Possible deliverables
Suitable inputs
- A selected use case with an identified owner and decision objective
- Relevant inventory and readiness findings, including unresolved risks
Possible deliverables
- A documented architecture decision and evidence level
- A controlled laboratory prototype or narrowly scoped implementation
05 / Evolext Quantum
Inspect an observation. Understand its limits.
One finding from the existing synthetic QuantumSafe Scanner v0.2.0 report. This is example data, not a customer system or an operational security assessment.
A cryptographic dependency is declared
package.json:4
QS7001
declaration npm:jose
jose ^6.0.0Inspect a finding. Know its limits.
See more info
- Detected
- A local dependency declaration names jose. The file, line, rule, and symbol below come directly from the sample report.
- Suggested follow-up
- Ask the system owner whether the dependency is used, where it is reachable, and which algorithms and protocol roles it serves.
- Not established
- The declaration does not prove execution, vulnerability, quantum resistance, or the readiness of the wider system.
The prototype examines supported source files and recognized local dependency declarations. It does not inspect runtime behavior, certificates, networks, configuration, or cloud environments. Static observations and synthetic examples cannot prove comprehensive coverage. Public executable downloads remain unavailable.
Explore the complete report ↗Evidence labels
- Educational guidance
- Explanations supported by cited sources; not a system assessment.
- Synthetic sample
- Constructed examples for inspecting report behavior; not client evidence.
- Laboratory prototype
- Observations from a bounded test environment; not production assurance.
06 / Evolext Quantum
Standards are a starting point, not a deployment claim.
These are finalized algorithm standards. Protocol integration, vendor support, implementation quality, and operational suitability must be checked separately. Consult each publication’s current errata and updates. Referencing a FIPS publication does not certify Evolext, the scanner, or your system.
FIPS 203
ML-KEM
Key encapsulation to establish a shared secret; not bulk-data encryption.
FIPS 203 ↗FIPS 204
ML-DSA
Module-lattice digital signatures for signing and verification.
FIPS 204 ↗FIPS 205
SLH-DSA
Stateless hash-based digital signatures for signing and verification.
FIPS 205 ↗Sources & editorial approach
Last reviewed:
We prefer primary publications, distinguish standards from implementation evidence, and record review dates. Revisit claims as sources and platforms change. Report a correction with the page and supporting source.
Suggest a correction ↗07 / Evolext Quantum
Choose a useful starting point.
Three foundations, then a reading path matched to the decisions you need to make.
01 / Foundations
Post-quantum cryptography: the starting point
Read guide ↗02 / DiscoveryBuild an inventory you can review
Read guide ↗03 / EngineeringPlan an application migration increment
Read guide ↗Explore reading paths
08 / Evolext Quantum
Questions before you begin.
Do we need quantum hardware?
No. PQC algorithms run on conventional computing platforms. Your chosen implementation still needs compatible libraries, protocols, and platforms.
Can the scanner prove readiness?
No. It provides bounded discovery observations for human review. Missing findings do not prove the absence of cryptography or quantum-related risks.
Does every algorithm need replacement?
No. The role, strength, and implementation matter. Prioritize vulnerable public-key uses and review symmetric encryption and hashes in context.
What should we prepare for an assessment?
Prepare a high-level architecture, system owners, dependency information, data-lifetime requirements, and vendor constraints. Agree evidence handling before sharing sensitive materials.
Does Evolext perform production migration?
Current work focuses on research, assessment, and controlled laboratory prototypes. Production engineering, deployment, validation, and assurance require a separately agreed scope; submitting an inquiry does not establish delivery availability.
Define the question worth investigating.
Tell us which system or migration decision you want to explore. Keep the first inquiry high-level; do not submit credentials, private keys, secrets, or confidential reports.
Discuss your scope ↗Submitted contact details are stored in Supabase, and notifications may be sent through LINE. Read the privacy policy ↗