// Capability Statement — Download PDF
Insights / Quantum Readiness
Quantum Readiness

Quantum-ready is a deadline, not a physics problem.

Harvest-now-decrypt-later, the NIST PQC standards, CNSA 2.0’s 2033 line — and why the migration is an inventory problem the RMF already knows how to run.

Ausper Technology · August 23, 2026 · Insight · Quantum · Post-Quantum Cryptography

Quantum-ready does not mean owning a quantum computer. It means your systems can survive one existing — and the threat clock started years ago. Adversaries who record encrypted traffic today can decrypt it the day a cryptographically relevant quantum computer arrives; the intelligence community calls this harvest now, decrypt later. For data with a long secrecy lifetime — clearance records, weapons data, health files — the exposure exists now, which is why quantum readiness is a present-tense compliance obligation, not futurism.

The deadlines are already on paper

In August 2024 NIST finalized the first post-quantum cryptography standards: FIPS 203 (ML-KEM) for key encapsulation, FIPS 204 (ML-DSA) and FIPS 205 (SLH-DSA) for digital signatures. NSA's CNSA 2.0 suite sets the migration path for national security systems, with quantum-resistant algorithms required in new acquisitions this decade and full transition targeted by 2033. OMB memorandum M-23-02 already requires civilian agencies to inventory their cryptography annually and prioritize what migrates first, and the Quantum Computing Cybersecurity Preparedness Act made PQC migration federal law in December 2022. None of this waits for the quantum computer to exist.

Quantum readiness is an ATO problem

Strip the physics away and PQC migration is work every accreditation team recognizes: find every place cryptography lives — TLS terminations, VPNs, code signing, PKI, data at rest, vendor appliances — then plan and evidence the change. That is a cryptographic inventory feeding a gap analysis, landing in the SSP, tracked on the POA&M, verified by continuous monitoring, governed by the same SC-12 and SC-13 controls your package already carries. The systems that migrate cleanly will be the ones designed for crypto-agility: swapping an algorithm without rearchitecting the system. Teams that treat this as a checkbox will rediscover their cryptography one appliance at a time, in production.

Where Ausper stands

This is our lane arriving at a new address. The risk assessments and gap analyses we deliver extend naturally to cryptographic inventory and PQC-readiness assessment — the same discipline AccelSecure™ applies to authorization, pointed at the quantum transition. And the quantum conversation at Ausper is not theoretical: Ausper Labs runs quantum-dot research, patent pending, alongside its directed-energy and photonics work. If your agency or program needs to answer "where is our cryptography, and what breaks first" — start that conversation now, while 2033 is still a plan and not an emergency.

Common questions

When do federal systems have to be quantum-ready?
The milestones are staged, not one date. OMB M-23-02 already requires civilian agencies to inventory their cryptographic systems annually. NSA's CNSA 2.0 requires quantum-resistant algorithms in new national security system acquisitions this decade, with full transition targeted by 2033. Waiting for a quantum computer to be announced means starting years too late — recorded traffic is already exposed to future decryption.
What is harvest-now-decrypt-later?
An adversary records your encrypted traffic today and stores it until a cryptographically relevant quantum computer can break the key exchange that protected it. Anything with a secrecy lifetime longer than the arrival of that computer — personnel records, design data, intelligence — is effectively already at risk, which is why migration urgency does not depend on when the machine actually arrives.
What does a quantum-readiness assessment actually produce?
Three things: a cryptographic inventory — every algorithm, key length, protocol and dependency in the boundary, including what vendors embed in appliances; a prioritized gap analysis against the NIST PQC standards and CNSA 2.0, ranked by data lifetime and exposure; and a migration roadmap that lands in the artifacts your authorizing official already reads — the SSP, the POA&M, and the continuous-monitoring plan.

Related reading

Put this to work

Need it done, not just explained?

This is the work we do every day. Tell us where your program stands and we'll give you a straight answer.

Talk to Ausper