DISSENT IN THE TEMPLE
four objections we take seriously · and how we answer them
TAKE SERIOUSLY
answer honestly
THE TIMELINE SCEPTIC
"Cryptographically relevant quantum computers are farther out than you say."
OUR REPLY
Possibly. Our 15-qubit point is low on the scaling curve. But HNDL makes T_Q less important than T_now + D.
THE LATTICE DOUBTER
"Lattice security is younger than RSA's; a classical break could land first."
OUR REPLY
NIST standardized three primitives (lattice + lattice + hash) and rotation paths. We build for agility, not a single bet.
THE HYBRID PURIST
"Hybrid is complexity; why not wait for pure PQC?"
OUR REPLY
Hybrid is the conservative choice. Bloat is 1 KB. A break in ML-KEM does not downgrade you to pure RSA.
THE COMPLIANCE PRAGMATIST
"My compliance framework does not require this yet."
OUR REPLY
Frameworks lag by design. If D > 10 years for your data, you are electing to be migrated at sector-average pace.
N
E
S
W
NODE
M