How to Implement the Operational Playbook for Post-Quantum Security Readiness
- 8 minutes ago
- 4 min read
David Firnhaber holds a PhD in Technology Innovation Management for his publication in the field of Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) regarding the future of quantum decryption. He is currently a professor at Ivy Tech Community College and is pursuing a second PhD in Cybersecurity GRC while focusing his research on human trafficking in cyberspace.
This playbook turns the assessment detailed in the previous article, “Decryption Attack Brief,” into an auditable program for defenders. The previous brief explained the qubit gap, harvest-now strategies, and emerging low-overhead gate paradigms. This article provides the concrete triggers, pilot designs, procurement language, monitoring cadence, and a prioritized 90-day plan you need to move from risk assessment to measurable action.[1]
Key metric: Confidentiality lifetime
Treat confidentiality lifetime as the single triage metric. Anything that must remain secret for ten years or more is a high priority. Inventory every use of public key cryptography, assign an owner, and record the confidentiality lifetime. Use that inventory to produce a ranked top 20 list that drives pilots, procurement, and budget requests.[2]
Triggers that change posture
Define four posture states: Watch, Prepare, Accelerate, and Emergency, and move between them only on engineering evidence. The signals that matter are reproducible, error-corrected logical-qubit demonstrations; peer-reviewed gate depth estimates for Shor at 2,048 bits with realistic error models; and validated end-to-end MBQC/CV/fusion demonstrations, accompanied by accredited lab reports. Elevate posture when two signals appear or when a single signal is backed by vendor roadmaps plus independent validation. Treat vendors’ press releases as probability inputs, not binary triggers.[3]
Dual stack pilot: 45-day canary first experiment
Run one focused pilot within 45 days targeting a public API, an internal PKI, and a constrained device class. Baseline classical performance for 14 days, deploy a 5 percent canary for 14 days, then ramp to 25 percent for 30 days while collecting median and 95th percentile handshake latency, throughput under load, signature and key size deltas, CPU and memory impact, interoperability failures, and rollback time. Define success as a median latency increase under 10 percent, interoperability failures under 0.1 percent over 30 days, and automated rollback within SLA. Use pilot results to quantify operational costs and prioritize the top 20 assets for migration.[3]
Procurement teeth and validation
Insert three non-waivable clauses into every critical RFP and renewal: Disclosure of logical qubit projections, error correction assumptions, gate depth accounting, and state preparation cost models; acceptance contingent on an accredited third-party lab report demonstrating interoperability and side-channel resistance under agreed test vectors; and deprecation plus remediation commitments, including funded fixes if claims are materially false. Budget for one lab validation per critical vendor and subscribe to an independent test house to reduce reliance on marketing milestones.[3]
Supply chain and artifact hardening
Shorten key lifetimes embedded in firmware and images, require reproducible builds and cryptographic attestations for delivered artifacts, and dual-sign critical updates. Treat widely reused libraries and signed images as high-value targets for harvest-now campaigns and require vendors to demonstrate short-lived key strategies and rotation plans.[2]
Monitoring cadence and governance
Automate weekly scans of vendor engineering blogs and major lab preprints, run monthly reviews of peer-reviewed papers and accredited lab newsletters for MBQC/CV/fusion demos, and update the quarterly internal risk scorecard tied to budget decision gates. Configure event-driven alerts that convene the incident cell immediately when any trigger fires. Feed these signals into your risk dashboard and tie them to funded decision gates so posture changes are auditable.[4]
Translate triggers into actions
During the Preparation phase, fund and run dual-stack pilots for the top 20 assets, require vendor disclosure for critical suppliers, and schedule independent lab validation. On Accelerate, mandate re-encryption or migration for decade-lived secrets and accelerate procurement of post-quantum capable replacements. During the Emergency phase, execute prioritized migrations, invoke contractual remediation, and create a cross-functional incident cell to manage re-encryption, legal, and regulatory notifications.[3]
90-day execution plan: Owners and outcomes
Days 0-14: Security engineering completes the crypto inventory tagged by confidentiality lifetime and identifies the top 20 assets. Days 15-45: Engineering runs the dual-stack pilot, collects metrics, and tests rollback. Decision gate at day 45. Days 46-75: Procurement and legal steps require inserting the clauses into new RFPs as well as commissioning lab validation for critical vendors. Days 76-90: Risk leadership operationalizes monitoring, briefs the board, and requests migration funding and a contingency budget. Track outcomes against success criteria and publish an internal after-action report.[3]
Tabletop exercises and readiness
Run exercises that simulate a vendor compromise, then a later credible demonstration that will materially decrease the qubit budget. Use these exercises to validate SLAs, rollback plans, and readiness for executing emergency re-encryption. Document outcomes and incorporate them into procurement and budget requests so lessons become contractual and operational requirements.[2]
Closing and next steps
Keep the program lean and platform-agnostic: inventory, pilot, validate, procure, monitor, fund. Monitor multiple hardware families and modalities because the first practical low-overhead gate demonstration could come from trapped ion, superconducting, photonic, or neutral atom programs; treat any credible, independently validated demonstration from any vendor as a signal. For the technical threat framing that motivated this playbook, see the previous article, “Decryption Attack Brief.”[1]
If you have questions or want help translating these recommendations into procurement language, monitoring checklists, or a prioritized migration plan, feel free to reach out to David K. Firnhaber, PhD.
Read more from David K Firnhaber
David K Firnhaber, Doctor of Philosophy in Cybersecurity
David Firnhaber is a proven expert in post-quantum cryptography with a rich background in cybersecurity. Leveraging his leadership and scholastic excellence, he consistently delivers his continued doctoral-level research and is positioned to share his knowledge with many students. Outside of work, David Firnhaber enjoys songwriting, the outdoors, painting, and documentaries, adding a unique perspective to his writing.
References:
