NIST-PQC vs QES-KX

A Comparison of Hybrid Classical + Post-Quantum Key Exchange Approaches

🛡️ Interactive Comparison

Explore how our hybrid classical + post-quantum key exchange compares to NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography standards

- Key Advantages of QES-KX™ -

🔒 Defense-in-Depth

Classical (X25519 ECDH): well-vetted, decades of cryptanalysis

Post-Quantum (ML-KEM-768, NIST FIPS 203): resists Shor's algorithm

Combined via HKDF — breaking the final key requires breaking both, independently

🛡️ Zero-Trust Relay

The relay server never sees the pre-shared secret, either party's private key, or the derived key

Verified by an automated test proving a passive observer with everything actually transmitted still cannot derive the key

✅ Hardware-Seeded Entropy

Ephemeral key material seeded from real IBM Quantum hardware randomness

Traceable to verifiable job IDs — not just an OS PRNG

🚀 Easy Migration

Hybrid-friendly architecture

Layer on top of existing systems

No hard forks required

🔁 Quantum-Resistant by Design

ML-KEM-768 is a NIST-standardized post-quantum algorithm, secure against known quantum attacks

Security rests on the hardness of the underlying math problems — not a claim of physics-guaranteed, unconditional security

🏭 Production Ready

Production SDK available

14 operational API endpoints

Entropy source validated on real quantum hardware

📊 Detailed Comparison

Aspect NIST PQC Our Hybrid System
Security Basis Computational hardness (lattice problem) Computational hardness (ECDH + lattice, combined)
Key Material Size ~2,272 bytes (ML-KEM-768 public key + ciphertext) ~3,616 bytes total (adds X25519 material + MACs on top of ML-KEM-768)
Long-Term Guarantee Secure until math breakthrough Secure until both ECDH and the lattice problem break (defense-in-depth)
Migration Complexity High (hard forks) Hybrid-friendly (layer on top)
Proof of Security Theoretical + standardization Standard construction + automated test proving a passive relay observer cannot derive the key
Current Readiness Software libraries ready Production SDK; quantum-hardware-seeded entropy

📊 GHZ Entanglement Research vs. Traditional Quantum Key Distribution Protocols

How our GHZ entanglement hardware research compares to traditional quantum key distribution implementations. This is a hardware-validation research result, not our production key exchange — see "Zero-Trust Hybrid Key Exchange" above for what's actually deployed.

Aspect BB84 E91 Our GHZ Research
Security Basis Quantum no-cloning Bell states GHZ entanglement
Hardware Requirements Quantum channel Entangled photons NISQ hardware
Range Limited (~100km) Limited (~100km) Cloud-based (unlimited)
Fidelity High (ideal conditions) High (ideal conditions) 35-94% (NISQ validated)
Scalability Limited Limited 2-28 qubits validated
Production Use Specialized hardware Specialized hardware 🔬 Research/demo — not the production key exchange

🔬 Hardware Validation

Our GHZ entanglement research has been validated on real quantum hardware, not just simulated — and that same hardware entropy seeds the ephemeral randomness in our production key exchange

IBM Quantum ibm_fez

  • Backend: Heron R2 (156 qubits)
  • Fidelity: 69% (12-qubit GHZ state)
  • Job ID: d5gs5mkpe0pc73alki40
  • Status: ✅ Verified (research result)

GHZ Key-Matching Research

  • Error Rate: 0%
  • Perfect Correlation: ✅
  • Status: 🔬 Research result — not the production key exchange
  • Hardware Validated: ✅

Ready to Protect Your Digital Assets?

Our hybrid system combines classical and post-quantum cryptography with quantum-hardware-seeded randomness — defense-in-depth security you can deploy today

Get Started Learn More