Innovation, Quantum-AI Technology & Law

Blog over Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum, Deep Learning, Blockchain en Big Data Law

Blog over juridische, sociale, ethische en policy aspecten van Kunstmatige Intelligentie, Quantum Computing, Sensing & Communication, Augmented Reality en Robotica, Big Data Wetgeving en Machine Learning Regelgeving. Kennisartikelen inzake de EU AI Act, de Data Governance Act, cloud computing, algoritmes, privacy, virtual reality, blockchain, robotlaw, smart contracts, informatierecht, ICT contracten, online platforms, apps en tools. Europese regels, auteursrecht, chipsrecht, databankrechten en juridische diensten AI recht.

Berichten met de tag post-quantum cryptography
Responsible Quantum-Enabled Financial Forecasting: What Banks and Supervisors Must Govern Before Quantum Advantage

Banks were talking about quantum computing while the hardware was still a physics demonstration. In 2025, financial institutions reported further hardware experiments, including a hybrid bond-trading study on production-scale data, and these remain research results rather than live production deployments. This analysis separates the verified results from the marketing and asks what responsible quantum finance demands before the technology touches live forecasting.

Which banks ran quantum experiments in 2025, and what they found

The evidence base is suddenly concrete. A JPMorganChase-led research collaboration demonstrated certified randomness on Quantinuum hardware in a Nature paper, a cryptographic and simulation primitive rather than a forecasting result. HSBC and IBM reported up to 34 percent better fill-probability predictions, on their chosen metric and against their own classical baselines, on production-scale bond-trading data. Goldman Sachs researchers priced out what genuine advantage in derivatives would cost in logical qubits. Each result comes with caveats, and the caveats are exactly where governance begins.

How supervisors will apply model risk management to quantum models

Financial regulators already police predictive models, from classical statistics to artificial intelligence, through model risk management regimes like the Federal Reserve's SR 11-7. Quantum forecasting strains that machinery: outputs are probabilistic, hardware noise drifts daily, and in at least one bank experiment the noise itself seemed to help. The essay sets out what quantum-grade validation, documentation, and independent challenge should look like.

Why compute asymmetry and post-quantum migration belong on the same agenda

Two system-level risks frame the institutional ones. If early capability concentrates in a few firms, markets inherit a new compute asymmetry, a market-integrity question with echoes of the concentration concerns we mapped in Intellectual Property in Quantum Computing and Market Power.

The same progress that speeds up forecasting breaks the encryption financial infrastructure depends on. The G7 Cyber Expert Group has warned that adversaries may be harvesting encrypted financial data today to decrypt later, and now urges a coordinated post-quantum migration across the sector. Decades-long confidentiality horizons and expiring cryptography are two sides of one balance sheet.

The conclusion is practical: the governance hooks for quantum technology in finance already exist in model risk management, operational resilience, AI oversight, and cryptographic standards. What is missing is an explicit statement, from supervisors and boards alike, of how quantum capability plugs into each hook. Read the full analysis for the verified experiments, the validation blueprint, and the governance framework.

Meer lezen
Statute-Led Quantum Governance: A Legislative Blueprint for the United States

On June 22, 2026, the White House signed two quantum executive orders in one afternoon: a national push toward a science-enabling quantum computer, and an accelerated federal migration to post-quantum cryptography. The orders are far-reaching and structurally fragile. A later administration can amend or revoke executive action far more easily than Congress can repeal a statute, and executive action cannot appropriate a dollar or settle the values by which quantum technology will be governed. That work belongs to Congress.

What Congress has in motion in 2026 and why it is still revocable

The 2026 federal landscape is busy and brittle. The National Quantum Initiative reauthorization is moving through both chambers after its predecessor died with the 118th Congress, a $2.5 billion Department of Energy quantum bill waits alongside it, and export controls on quantum computing arrived by interim rule in 2024. Every instrument is revocable, expirable, or reversible. The United States has quantum legislation in the National Quantum Initiative Act and still lacks a comprehensive quantum statute. Governing by summit communiqué instead of binding rule is a wider habit, as our analysis From Kananaskis to Évian shows for the G7.

Why statutes serve foundational technologies better than accreted guidance

Foundational technologies mature on timescales longer than administrations, cut across agency jurisdictions, and allocate power in ways that deserve democratic sanction. The artificial intelligence precedent is cautionary: congressional silence produced a state patchwork in which Colorado's pioneering AI statute was rewritten before it ever took effect. A quantum statute with values-based guardrails, from risk tiers to trials pathways and access equity, is innovation policy in its own right. It gives investors, allies, and the public reasons to trust the ecosystem being built.

The eight-part blueprint for a United States quantum act

The full analysis lays out an eight-part legislative blueprint: capability-based definitions that survive hardware generations, risk-tiered obligations, statutory post-quantum cryptography deadlines, a standing standards mandate for NIST, regulatory sandboxes, calibrated research security, national quantum-advantage missions with a software institute, and workforce plus allied coordination. It merges the reauthorization bills, the DOE act, and the executive orders into one coherent act of Congress.

Europe's Quantum Act proposal is expected in 2026, and the EU has made statute-led governance its brand, from the AI Act's risk tiers to the Quantum Europe Strategy. America's answer should be transatlantic interoperability: shared risk concepts, mutual recognition, aligned export regimes. The reauthorization vehicles moving through both chambers this session give Congress a rare moment when legislative ambition costs little more than drafting. Read the full analysis for the blueprint and the case for using that moment.

Meer lezen
The Quantum Internet: Teleportation, Entanglement, QKD, PQC and Hybrid Security Strategies

The quantum internet will do something classical networks cannot do at all: distribute entanglement between cities, teleport quantum states, and detect interception at the protocol level. This explainer walks the whole stack for a legal and policy audience: teleportation, quantum key distribution over fiber and satellite, the NIST post-quantum standards, and the hybrid strategies that boards and ministries must adopt long before the network itself matures. The physics is subtle. The policy consequences are concrete and come with deadlines.

What Delft, The Hague and the Micius satellite have already demonstrated

The milestones are no longer thought experiments. In 2024, researchers entangled quantum processors in Delft and The Hague over 25 kilometers of ordinary underground telecom fiber, a genuine metropolitan quantum network link. China's Micius satellite has distributed quantum keys between ground stations 7,600 kilometers apart, securing a videoconference between Beijing and Vienna. The strategic significance of who builds and controls these networks is examined in the CNAS Entanglement Edge quantum networking report. Teleportation itself is routinely misread: it transfers a quantum state using entanglement plus a classical signal. No matter moves, nothing exceeds light speed, and the original state is destroyed.

Why the post-quantum deadlines exist years before the hardware

The urgency is cryptographic. A future quantum computer running Shor's algorithm breaks RSA and elliptic-curve encryption, and adversaries are already recording traffic to decrypt later, the harvest-now-decrypt-later attack. NIST answered in August 2024 with its first finalized post-quantum standards (ML-KEM, ML-DSA, SLH-DSA) and selected the code-based HQC in March 2025 as a future backup. Migration timelines from U.S. and European authorities cluster around 2030 to 2035. For long-lived data, interception already creates the confidentiality risk, because retained ciphertext may become readable later.

How layered security replaces the search for a single quantum fix

The central argument is architectural. Security in the quantum transition comes from hybrid strategies: classical plus post-quantum key establishment, AES-256 payload encryption, QKD only on high-value links where its trusted-node risks are consciously accepted, and crypto-agility as the governing design principle. The analysis closes with a concrete sequence for enterprises and governments: build the cryptographic inventory, triage data by confidentiality lifetime, write post-quantum requirements into procurement and audits, and run quantum-network pilots with candid trusted-node risk assessments. Read on to see how physics, standards, and statecraft interlock, and why the migration calendar is an obligation of today.

Meer lezen