You wrote:

...

The point I am making is that the logical rules you use don't apply down here.

I believe I see what you mean - your argument is that there's no way to know whether or not there will be a dramatic increase in computational ability through QM, whether it be through brute force or "smarter" quantum techniques. What comes to mind immediately is a quantum-oriented genetic decryption algorithm running on a QM computer. If this algorithm could sense and maintain memory of subtle c-text differences, it could make optimizing choices toward eventual decryption.

I guess my confusion came from the notion that "well, you're only examining one part of the state space at any given instant, so what's the big deal so long as we increase key length to compensate" ? Under QM, it seems that leaps, somewhat akin to human "intuition", could occur.

I hope I'm closer to understanding your point.

-- Best regards,

Curtis D. Frye - Job Search Underway!!! cfrye@ciis.mitre.org or cfrye@mason1.gmu.edu "Here today, gone ?????"

That sums up pretty nicely. Another aspect that I was getting at is that this is new and using the old rules to handle new technology has always been proven wrong historicaly. And I figure it is a cinch that Big Brother won't tell us ahead of time if we are wrong. Take care.