Citation :

Rashmi Kuksal, Sumit Chaudhary, Ashish Bhatt, "Comparative Analysis of Existing Quantum Security Algorithms: PQC and QKD Protocols," International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 12-20, 2026. Crossref, https://doi.org/10.14445/23488387/IJCSE-V13I6P102

Abstract

Quantum computing poses a challenge as well as an unprecedented opportunity to current cryptography. The algorithm by Shor and Grover shows that popular classical cryptosystems, including Rivest-Shamir- Adleman (RSA) and Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC), are susceptible to a quantum attack, and quantum-safe security designs should be created. The paper gives a comparative analysis of the current quantum security algorithms, including Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) and Quantum Key Distribution (QKD). Their trade-offs in working, their strengths, weaknesses, performance, and practical considerations are analyzed. Based on the comparative analysis provided below, hybrid cryptographic systems, in turn, a combination of PQC algorithm and QKD protocol, may be considered a good opportunity to make communication systems secure in the post-quantum era. The findings underline that PQC can be deployed practically in an already existing communication network environment, yet QKD is only subject to unconditional security, but needs dedicated quantum hardware and communication systems.

Keywords

BB84 Protocol, Post-Quantum Cryptography, Quantum Key Distribution, Quantum Security, Lattice-based Cryptography, Shor’s Algorithm.

References

1. Cédric Pilatte, Unconditional Correctness of Recent Quantum Algorithms for Factoring and Computing Discrete Logarithms, Forum of Mathematics, Pi, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14, pp. 1-25, 2026.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
2. Olli Ahonen, Mikko Möttönen, and Jeremy L. O’Brien, “Entanglement-Enhanced Quantum Key Distribution,” Physical Review A, vol. 78, no. 3, pp. 1-44, 2008.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
3. Giovanni Amedeo Cirillo et al., “Advances in Molecular Quantum Computing: from Technological Modeling to Circuit Design,” 2020 IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI (ISVLSI), Limassol, Cyprus, pp. 132-137, 2020.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
4. Naser Mohammadzadeh, Mehdi Sedighi, and Morteza Saheb Zamani, “Gate Location Changing: An Optimization Technique for Quantum Circuits,” International Journal of Quantum Information, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1-15, 2012.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
5. Artyom M. Grigoryan, and Sos S. Agaian, “3-Qubit Circular Quantum Convolution Computation using the Fourier Transform with Illustrative Examples,” Journal of Quantum Computing, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-14, 2024.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
6. Hiral B. Patel et al., “The Future of Quantum Computing and its Potential Applications,” Journal for Basic Sciences, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 513-519, 2023.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Chi-Chuan Hwang, Chu-Yuan Tseng, and Cheng-Fang Su, “Quantum Circuit Design for Computer-Assisted Shor’s Algorithm,” TechRxiv, pp. 1-27, 2022.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
8. Vaishali Bhatia, and K.R. Ramkumar, “An Efficient Quantum Computing Technique for Cracking RSA using Shor’s Algorithm,” 2020 IEEE 5^th International Conference on Computing Communication and Automation (ICCCA), Greater Noida, India, pp. 89-94, 2020.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
9. Anocha Yimsiriwattana, and Samuel J. Lomonaco Jr, “Distributed Quantum Computing: A Distributed Shor Algorithm,” Quantum Information and Computation II, vol. 5436, pp. 360-372, 2004.
   [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
10. Shuangcheng Jia, “Comparison of Performances for Quantum and Conventional Algorithms: Shor’s Algorithm and Boson Sampling,” Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology, vol. 38, pp. 493-501, 2023.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
11. Aidan Dang, Charles D. Hill, and Lloyd C.L. Hollenberg, “Optimising Matrix Product State Simulations of Shor’s Algorithm,” Quantum, vol. 3, pp. 1-9, 2019.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
12. Andrew W. Cross et al., “Open Quantum Assembly Language,” arXiv Preprint, pp. 1-24, 2017.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
13. Hoa T. Nguyen, Muhammad Usman, and Rajkumar Buyya, “iQUANTUM: A Toolkit for Modeling and Simulation of Quantum Computing Environments,” Software: Practice and Experience, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 1141-1171, 2024.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
14. Daniel J. Bernstein et al., “Classic McEliece: Conservative Code-based Cryptography,” NIST Submissions, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-25, 2017.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Ward Beullens, “Breaking Rainbow takes a Weekend on a Laptop,” Advances in Cryptology – CRYPTO 2022: 42^nd Annual International Cryptology Conference, CRYPTO 2022, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, vol. 13508, pp. 464-479, 2022.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
16. Wouter Castryck, and Thomas Decru, “An Efficient Key Recovery Attack on SIDH,” Advances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2023: 42^nd Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Lyon, France, vol. 14008, pp. 423-447, 2023.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]