Quantum-Resistant Cryptography in Zero Trust Architecture: A necessary change in Cloud Computing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the rapidly evolving digital landscape, the convergence of quantum computing and cloud environments necessitates a paradigm shift in cryptographic practices. This study explores the integration of Quantum-Resistant Cryptography (QRC) within Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) frameworks to address emerging security vulnerabilities in cloud computing infrastructures. As quantum computing advances, traditional cryptographic mechanisms, like RSA and ECC, become increasingly susceptible due to their vulnerability to quantum attacks. Quantum algorithms, such as Shor's and Grover's, can significantly expedite the decryption processes, rendering conventional encryption methods ineffective. This research emphasizes the critical need for QRC as a foundational element in securing cloud-based systems against the quantum threat. It examines various cryptographic methods that are resistant to quantum attacks, including lattice-based, hashbased, and code-based cryptography, and evaluates their potential integration into ZTA environments. The paper highlights the principles of Zero Trust Architecture-namely, "Never Trust, Always Verify" and "Least Privilege Access"-and discusses how these principles are crucial in a cloud context where traditional perimeter-based security models are obsolete. Furthermore, the study discusses the challenges and implications of implementing these advanced cryptographic solutions in real-world scenarios. Performance considerations, particularly in largescale deployments, are analyzed to understand the trade-offs between security enhancements and operational efficiency. The research provides insights into best practices and recommendations for transitioning to quantum-resistant cryptographic standards within Zero Trust frameworks to ensure robust, future-proof security in cloud computing. By bridging the gap between theoretical advancements and practical implementations, this paper contributes to the discourse on quantumsafe strategies in cybersecurity, advocating for a proactive approach to counteract the quantum threat in an increasingly interconnected world.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".