Quantum Threat Readiness Assessments

A Strategic Imperative for Future-Proofing Cryptographic Infrastructure in a Post-Quantum World

Author

Devona Green Jordan
June 18, 2025

In partnership with

Secure credentials. Easy admin control. No loose ends.

Onboarding shouldn’t involve hunting down logins. Offboarding shouldn’t leave security holes. And enforcing password policies shouldn’t require a dedicated IT team.

Proton Pass for Business gives you centralized control over your team's credentials, so you can move fast without sacrificing security.

Add a new hire? Grant them access to shared vaults in seconds.

Offboarding? Revoke their credentials with one click.

Enforce strong password hygiene, log activity, and stay audit-ready — all from one simple dashboard. No complicated setup or steep learning curve.

Teams of all sizes use Proton Pass to stay compliant and increase productivity while protecting what matters. Built by the teams behind Proton Mail and SimpleLogin and trusted by over 50,000 businesses worldwide.

If your team moves fast, your security should too.

Interesting Tech Fact:

Most organizations vastly underestimate the timeline required for quantum-safe migration—a Quantum Threat Readiness Assessment (QTRA) can reveal that replacing all vulnerable cryptographic assets may take 5–10 years, especially in legacy-rich environments like healthcare and critical infrastructure. What's lesser known is that even dormant data—so-called "harvest-now, decrypt-later" targets—are already being intercepted today, meaning that quantum risk is not a future threat but a present-day vulnerability. Without a QTRA, organizations often have no visibility into these silent exposures.

Introduction: The Calm Before the Quantum Storm

The race toward quantum supremacy is no longer a hypothetical sprint — it’s a slow-burning arms race fueled by global investments, academic breakthroughs, and classified government programs. While we have not yet crossed the threshold where quantum computers can decisively break widely deployed cryptographic standards, experts agree it is a matter of when — not if.

Quantum Threat Readiness Assessments (QTRAs) have emerged as a critical component of organizational cybersecurity strategy. These assessments provide a structured methodology for evaluating vulnerabilities to quantum-enabled attacks, determining cryptographic agility, and formulating migration paths toward post-quantum cryptography (PQC). In this article, we examine how QTRAs are conducted, what frameworks guide them, and why they are indispensable for future-proofing national and organizational security.

Understanding the Quantum Threat Landscape

At the core of quantum threats lies the Shor-Grover dichotomy. Shor’s algorithm enables exponential speedups for factoring large integers — devastating RSA, ECC, and other asymmetric encryption schemes. Meanwhile, Grover’s algorithm threatens symmetric encryption by offering quadratic speedups in brute-force key searches, making 128-bit symmetric keys marginal.

QTRAs address this emerging landscape by asking key questions:

  • Where is quantum-vulnerable cryptography being used in the system?

  • How can critical systems be made cryptographically agile?

  • What data, if harvested today, could be decrypted retroactively (“harvest now, decrypt later”)?

  • What timelines should be used to evaluate risk, compliance, and upgrades?

Key Components of a Quantum Threat Readiness Assessment

A QTRA is not a mere checklist. It’s a multifaceted evaluation typically organized around five pillars:

1. Cryptographic Inventory & Discovery

Most organizations have sprawling cryptographic footprints hidden deep within applications, APIs, third-party modules, and legacy systems. A thorough QTRA begins with:

  • Automated cryptographic discovery tools to scan for deprecated or non-quantum-safe algorithms.

  • Mapping of data-at-rest and data-in-transit protection mechanisms.

  • Identification of high-value assets susceptible to decryption in a post-quantum scenario.

2. Cryptographic Agility Maturity Model (CAMM)

Agility — the ability to swap cryptographic algorithms without architectural overhauls — is central to resilience. The CAMM framework assesses:

  • Whether cryptographic components are hardcoded or modular.

  • How frequently and easily algorithms can be updated.

  • The existence (or lack) of abstraction layers for key management, encryption, and hashing.

3. Risk Modeling: Harvest Now, Decrypt Later (HNDL)

The QTRA applies HNDL modeling to evaluate which data assets — even if secure today — may be exposed retroactively. Risk scoring is based on:

  • Sensitivity of data (e.g., trade secrets, medical records, national security).

  • Expected shelf life of data confidentiality.

  • Estimated timeline for quantum decryption feasibility (Q-Day modeling).

4. Transition Roadmap and Cryptographic Migration Planning

Once exposure is quantified, the QTRA helps build a phased plan:

  • Replace deprecated standards like RSA-2048 with NIST PQC candidates (e.g., Kyber, Dilithium).

  • Adopt hybrid cryptographic approaches during transition periods.

  • Ensure backward compatibility and regulatory compliance throughout.

5. Workforce and Policy Readiness

Organizations must also evaluate:

  • Internal cryptographic literacy and training gaps.

  • Governance policies for algorithm selection and lifecycle management.

  • Supplier and third-party compliance with post-quantum guidelines.

Case Study: QTRA in a National Critical Infrastructure Sector

In late 2024, a Quantum Threat Readiness Assessment (QTRA) was commissioned by the cybersecurity division of a national transportation authority overseeing over 1,200 miles of high-speed rail and integrated smart logistics hubs. The infrastructure relied heavily on industrial control systems (ICS), automated signaling networks, and cross-border data exchange platforms — all historically dependent on legacy VPN tunnels, RSA-2048 key exchanges, and ECC-based digital signatures for critical authentication. The assessment began with a comprehensive cryptographic asset inventory across 87 unique network zones, revealing that 62% of inter-controller communications still used protocols vulnerable to Shor’s algorithm. Many remote telemetry modules, some deployed as early as 2011, lacked cryptographic abstraction layers, meaning any change to their encryption logic required firmware rewrites — a significant agility risk. High-risk zones were flagged using a customized Harvest Now, Decrypt Later (HNDL) model that prioritized traffic logs, signaling commands, and real-time rail switch data, estimating that 28% of encrypted data could be retroactively decrypted within 8–10 years post-quantum, assuming moderately funded adversaries.

As a response, the authority implemented a staged migration strategy: first, deploying hybrid TLS with CRYSTALS-Kyber and RSA fallback across new control terminals, followed by upgrading legacy nodes using PQC-capable edge gateways to encapsulate older data flows. A cryptographic agility framework was embedded into procurement policies for all future industrial systems, mandating modular crypto libraries and PQC compliance by 2028. Over 600 engineers and security architects were retrained via an accelerated post-quantum curriculum developed in partnership with a local technical university. This QTRA not only hardened one of the country’s most critical infrastructure arteries but also set a precedent for national-level post-quantum migration planning.

Assessment Process:

  • Cryptographic Discovery: 9 different protocols used outdated asymmetric encryption.

  • Agility Evaluation: Most systems lacked modular crypto libraries. Firmware updates required physical device access.

  • Risk Scoring: Using HNDL models, GridSecure identified 35% of its telemetry archives could be exploited within 5–7 years post-Q-Day.

  • Migration Planning: The company adopted a phased transition to hybrid TLS (TLS 1.3 + Kyber512) on new devices, while older systems were fronted with cryptographic gateways.

  • Training & Policy: Over 150 engineers were trained on PQC concepts, and a new cryptographic agility policy was drafted for all future procurement.

Outcome:

By mid-2025, GridSecure achieved Level 3 Cryptographic Agility and committed to full PQC readiness by 2027 — well ahead of the predicted quantum decryption curve.

Tools and Frameworks Supporting QTRAs

NIST PQC Guidelines

The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has shortlisted algorithms like Kyber, Dilithium, and Falcon as quantum-safe standards. QTRAs often align migration plans with these.

NSA CNSA 2.0 Suite

Released in 2022, this suite offers cryptographic algorithms approved for national security systems through the 2030s, including PQC recommendations.

Open Quantum Safe (OQS)

An open-source project supporting integration of PQC algorithms into standard protocols like OpenSSL and liboqs — essential for cryptographic migration testing.

Cloud Provider Assessments

AWS, Google Cloud, and Azure have all released tools to audit and prepare infrastructure for quantum resilience. These can be integrated into QTRAs to ensure hybrid and cloud-native environments aren’t overlooked.

The Strategic Importance of QTRAs

Forward Secrecy in the Quantum Era

A common misconception is that data protected today is forever safe. QTRAs correct this notion by emphasizing temporal exposure — if an adversary records your encrypted data today, they might unlock it tomorrow.

Regulatory and Compliance Implications

With evolving mandates like the U.S. Cybersecurity Executive Order 14028 and international data protection laws (e.g., GDPR), failure to conduct QTRAs may result in legal liabilities post-Q-Day.

Educator and Researcher Engagement

Beyond enterprise, QTRAs offer a template for academic institutions and cybersecurity programs to educate the next generation on post-quantum readiness — a field still largely unstandardized and under-researched.

Barriers to Adoption and Mitigation

Despite their importance, QTRAs face common hurdles:

  • Technical Debt: Legacy systems with hardcoded crypto are inflexible.

  • Budgetary Constraints: Quantum readiness is often seen as non-urgent.

  • Knowledge Gaps: Few IT teams have deep familiarity with PQC.

Mitigation strategies include:

  • Early inventory and sandboxing of PQC algorithms on non-critical systems.

  • Cross-sector knowledge sharing through industry consortiums like the Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C).

  • Embedding crypto-agility in procurement standards and software development lifecycles (SDLC).

Conclusion: Future-Proofing Begins with Visibility

Quantum readiness isn’t just about installing a new algorithm — it’s about visibility, strategy, and agility. Quantum Threat Readiness Assessments give organizations the compass they need to navigate the fog of uncertainty in cryptographic futures. Those who wait risk retroactive compromise; those who act now gain a cryptographic edge for decades to come.

Further Reading