PQC Migration Roadmap: How to Build One and Where to Start
02. Juli 2026
ArtikelBuild a PQC migration roadmap: inventory and CBOM, risk ranking with Mosca, hybrid ML-KEM first, PKI next, and the 2027-2035 deadlines.
Artikel lesen
Harvest now, decrypt later (HNDL): how attackers store encrypted data to break it with a quantum computer, who is exposed, Mosca's rule and what to do now.
Harvest now, decrypt later (HNDL), also called store now, decrypt later, is an attack in which an adversary records encrypted traffic or copies encrypted data today and keeps it until a cryptographically relevant quantum computer can break the public-key cryptography that protected it. Any data that must stay confidential beyond the arrival of such a machine is already exposed, which is why post-quantum migration starts with the data that has the longest confidentiality life.
To see where your own exposure sits, start with a cryptographic inventory and the free Quantum Risk Score.
Imagine someone stealing your safe today, knowing they cannot open it now but confident they will have the tools in ten years. That is what harvest now, decrypt later means for encrypted data.
The attack has three steps, and only the last one needs a quantum computer.
What makes the threat different from ordinary attacks is that it is silent and retroactive. You will not know when the data was taken, and the damage happens years later, when nothing can be done about it.
HNDL targets confidentiality protected by public-key key establishment. In practice:
| Exposed to HNDL | Why |
|---|---|
| TLS, VPN (IPsec/IKE) and SSH sessions using RSA, ECDH or DH key exchange | The recorded handshake lets a quantum attacker recover the session key, even with forward secrecy |
| Files, emails and backups encrypted to an RSA or ECC public key (S/MIME, PGP, envelope encryption) | The wrapped data key can be unwrapped later |
| Key transport between systems (BYOK imports, key wrapping under RSA-OAEP) | A recorded key exchange exposes the key itself, and everything it encrypts |
| Not directly exposed to HNDL | Why |
|---|---|
| Data encrypted with AES-256 under keys that were never transmitted under public-key cryptography | Quantum attacks weaken symmetric ciphers far less; AES-256 is considered adequate |
| Digital signatures (RSA, ECDSA) | A future quantum computer can forge new signatures, but cannot "decrypt" old ones. This is a separate risk (sometimes called "trust now, forge later") and is handled in the signature and PKI part of the migration |
Forward secrecy does not help here. ECDHE protects past sessions against a later theft of the server's private key, but a quantum computer attacks the ephemeral key exchange in the recorded handshake directly.
The question is not whether data is sensitive, but how long it must stay confidential. Typical examples:
| Sector | Data with a long confidentiality life | Indicative shelf life |
|---|---|---|
| Government and defence | Classified information, diplomatic and intelligence traffic | Decades |
| Healthcare and life sciences | Patient records, genomic data, clinical trial data | A patient's lifetime |
| Banking and insurance | Client identity and account data, M&A files, long-term contracts | 10 years or more |
| Industry and technology | Designs, source code, formulas, trade secrets | As long as the product is sold |
| Critical infrastructure | Network diagrams, control-system credentials, device keys | Life of the installation, often 15 to 30 years |
| Legal and professional services | Privileged communications, case files | 10 years or more |
If your organization holds any of these, some of its encrypted traffic is already worth harvesting.
Michele Mosca, a researcher at the University of Waterloo, framed the timing question as a simple inequality:
X + Y > Z
If X + Y is greater than Z, data encrypted today is already exposed to harvest now, decrypt later.
A worked example: a bank holds client data that must stay confidential for 10 years (X = 10) and estimates its migration at 6 years (Y = 6). Even if a CRQC is 15 years away (Z = 15), the bank is already one year late, because 10 + 6 = 16. The only variables it controls are Y (migrate faster, starting with key exchange) and, sometimes, X (keep less data for less time).
Nobody knows the date, and credible estimates vary. What matters for planning is the direction of travel:
For HNDL, Z is not the date a quantum computer is announced. It is the date by which data you send today must still be secret.
X25519MLKEM768) protects new sessions against HNDL without changing certificates. OpenSSL 3.5 offers it by default. See our ML-KEM key management guide and the F5 BIG-IP and FortiGate IPsec guides.Q: What does harvest now, decrypt later mean?
It is an attack strategy in which an adversary collects encrypted data today and stores it until a quantum computer can break the public-key cryptography that protected it. The data is not readable when stolen, but becomes readable years later.
Q: Is store now, decrypt later the same thing?
Yes. Harvest now, decrypt later (HNDL), store now, decrypt later (SNDL) and "capture now, decrypt later" describe the same attack.
Q: Does forward secrecy protect against harvest now, decrypt later?
No. Forward secrecy protects past sessions if a long-term private key is stolen later. A quantum computer instead breaks the ephemeral ECDH or DH exchange recorded in each handshake. Only post-quantum or hybrid key exchange, such as ML-KEM, closes the gap.
Q: Is data encrypted with AES-256 safe?
AES-256 itself is considered quantum-resistant. The risk is how the AES key was established or wrapped: if it was exchanged or wrapped with RSA or ECC, recording that exchange exposes the key.
Q: Which data should we protect first?
Data that must stay confidential the longest, carried over links that use classical key exchange: for example health, identity, financial, defence and intellectual-property data. Mosca's inequality (X + Y > Z) helps rank it.
Q: Does post-quantum cryptography stop harvest now, decrypt later?
For data encrypted after you switch, yes: hybrid or pure ML-KEM key exchange protects new sessions. It cannot protect data that was already recorded under classical key exchange, which is why the migration should start with long-lived data now.
Geschrieben von
Nagib Aouini
Related Resources
Sagen Sie uns, wo Kontrolle heute schwierig ist. Wir helfen Ihnen, den nächsten praktischen Schritt zu finden.