Quantum’s Trilemma: Innovation, Security, and the Race for Supremacy

by

Author: Denis Avetisyan

Balancing the rapid advancement of quantum technology with national security concerns requires a new framework for protecting the emerging quantum industrial landscape.

This paper proposes a ‘Least Trade-Restrictive, Security-Sufficient, Innovation-Preserving (LSI)’ test to navigate the complex interplay between quantum innovation, intellectual property, and democratic resilience.

The accelerating development of quantum technologies presents a paradoxical challenge: fostering open innovation while mitigating emerging national security risks. This is the central concern of ‘The Nexus of Quantum Technology, Intellectual Property, and National Security: An LSI Test for Securing the Quantum Industrial Commons’, which argues for a proactive approach to securing the quantum industrial commons. The paper proposes a ‘Least Trade-Restrictive, Security-Sufficient, Innovation-Preserving’ (LSI) test as a framework for balancing these competing priorities and establishing standards-first interoperability. Can this LSI test effectively navigate the complex geopolitical landscape and prevent a self-defeating ‘Silicon Curtain’ in the quantum era?

Navigating the Quantum Frontier: Security in a Transformative Age

The accelerating development of quantum computing presents a fundamental challenge to modern cybersecurity infrastructure. Current encryption algorithms, such as RSA and ECC, which underpin the security of online transactions, sensitive data storage, and critical communications, rely on the computational difficulty of certain mathematical problems for their effectiveness. However, quantum computers, leveraging principles of quantum mechanics, possess the potential to solve these problems exponentially faster, rendering these widely-used cryptographic systems vulnerable to attack. This isn’t a distant threat; advancements in quantum hardware and algorithm development suggest that ‘cryptographically relevant quantum computers’ – machines capable of breaking current encryption – could emerge within the next decade, necessitating a swift and comprehensive reassessment of national security protocols and a transition to quantum-resistant cryptography to mitigate potentially catastrophic consequences.

Current international trade regulations and investment screening protocols prove inadequate when confronting the security risks posed by quantum computing. Existing frameworks primarily focus on tangible goods and readily identifiable dual-use technologies, struggling to address the subtle diffusion of quantum-relevant expertise, algorithms, and specialized components. Unlike conventional weapons or materials, the core vulnerabilities arise not from physical possession, but from the potential for decryption of currently secure communications and data-a threat that transcends borders and isn’t easily tracked by traditional export controls. Moreover, investment screening often overlooks the accumulation of quantum-adjacent capabilities within seemingly innocuous ventures, potentially allowing adversaries to build critical mass without triggering formal security reviews. This necessitates a shift towards monitoring the flow of quantum information and talent, alongside the development of new metrics to assess quantum-related risks that extend beyond conventional trade statistics.

Effectively governing quantum technologies requires a departure from conventional export controls and investment screening, necessitating instead a proactive and nuanced strategy that fosters innovation while mitigating emerging risks. Simply restricting access to quantum components or expertise proves insufficient, as the true vulnerabilities lie in the potential for future code-breaking capabilities and the development of quantum-resistant algorithms. A successful approach demands international cooperation to establish shared standards and protocols, alongside domestic policies that incentivize responsible research and development. This involves fostering a robust quantum workforce, supporting open-source initiatives to accelerate progress, and simultaneously investing in post-quantum cryptography to secure critical infrastructure. The aim isn’t to halt advancement, but to guide it – ensuring that the benefits of quantum computing are realized without compromising national security or creating a destabilizing technological imbalance.

The LSI Test: A Principled Framework for Quantum Governance

The Least Trade-Restrictive, Security-Sufficient, Innovation-Preserving (LSI) Test, as detailed in this paper, offers a systematic evaluation framework for quantum-related transactions and technologies. This methodology is designed to assess proposed controls based on three core principles: minimizing limitations on legitimate trade, ensuring an acceptable level of security against identified threats, and preserving opportunities for ongoing innovation within the quantum sector. The LSI Test is intended to provide a consistent and repeatable process for regulators and policymakers to determine appropriate oversight measures, balancing the need for control with the promotion of a thriving quantum technology ecosystem. The test’s structure facilitates objective analysis by requiring justification for any restrictions imposed, demonstrating that they are narrowly tailored to address specific security concerns without unduly hindering beneficial activity.

The LSI Test framework is predicated on a tiered assessment of quantum-related technologies and transactions, specifically designed to avoid imposing trade restrictions beyond those demonstrably necessary for security concerns. This prioritization is achieved by first evaluating the potential security implications of a given technology or transaction, and then determining the minimum level of restriction required to mitigate identified risks. Simultaneously, the framework incorporates criteria to assess the impact of potential restrictions on ongoing innovation within the quantum field, aiming to strike a balance that preserves research and development opportunities. The goal is to enable legitimate trade and collaboration while preventing the proliferation of technologies that could compromise national security, thus minimizing economic disruption and maximizing the benefits of quantum advancements.

The Least Trade-Restrictive, Security-Sufficient, Innovation-Preserving (LSI) Test is structured to accommodate the differing regulatory requirements of core quantum technology areas. Quantum computing necessitates stringent export controls due to its potential for codebreaking, while quantum sensing and metrology, with broader commercial and civilian applications, require less restrictive oversight. Quantum communication, specifically quantum key distribution (QKD), presents unique challenges related to encryption and data security, influencing trade regulations. Similarly, quantum simulation and networking technologies possess distinct risk profiles and innovation priorities. The LSI Test acknowledges these variances, enabling a tiered evaluation process that tailors restrictions and security protocols to the specific characteristics of each quantum technology pillar, thereby avoiding blanket regulations that could stifle beneficial development.

Operationalizing Security: Verification, Standards, and Practical Implementation

Effective implementation of the LSI Test necessitates robust verification procedures to confirm its accurate and reliable operation. Formal certification, conducted by an accredited third party, provides an objective assessment of the test’s adherence to defined specifications and security requirements. Complementing certification, auditable benchmarks – consisting of pre-defined test cases with expected results – allow for ongoing monitoring and validation of performance. These benchmarks should cover a range of input parameters and operational conditions to ensure comprehensive coverage and identify potential vulnerabilities or deviations from expected behavior. Regular auditing against these benchmarks, with documented results, establishes a clear audit trail and demonstrates due diligence in maintaining the integrity of the LSI Test.

Adopting established cryptographic standards, specifically those emerging from the NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) standardization process, significantly reduces the complexity and cost associated with implementing quantum-resistant algorithms. NIST PQC standards define a suite of algorithms undergoing rigorous evaluation for security and performance, providing a vetted selection for developers. Utilizing these standards ensures a degree of interoperability between different implementations and facilitates validation against a common baseline. This approach minimizes the need for proprietary solutions and accelerates the transition to post-quantum cryptography by leveraging a publicly available and widely scrutinized framework, ultimately reducing risks associated with algorithm selection and implementation errors.

Tiered disclosure involves the phased release of LSI Test implementation details and vulnerability information to specific stakeholder groups – initially to a core group of security researchers and developers for validation, followed by wider distribution to practitioners and, ultimately, public release after sufficient mitigation strategies are available. This controlled dissemination minimizes potential exploitation windows. Complementing this, a practitioner’s playbook provides standardized procedures, configuration guidelines, and troubleshooting steps for deploying and maintaining the LSI Test. This playbook serves as a central repository of knowledge, enabling consistent application of security measures and facilitating knowledge transfer among organizations responsible for implementing and operating the test, reducing the barrier to entry and promoting widespread adoption of best practices.

Protecting the Quantum Future: Intellectual Property, Investment, and Democratic Resilience

The pursuit of quantum technologies hinges significantly on robust intellectual property protections. Without these safeguards, the substantial investments required to pioneer advancements in quantum computing, sensing, and cryptography face considerable risk, potentially stifling innovation before it can fully materialize. Protecting inventions – from novel algorithms and hardware designs to unique materials and manufacturing processes – incentivizes researchers and companies to dedicate resources to pushing the boundaries of what’s possible. This, in turn, fosters a competitive landscape where breakthroughs are rewarded, driving further progress and ensuring a sustained advantage for those who lead in the quantum realm. A clear and enforceable IP framework isn’t merely a legal formality; it is the foundational element upon which the entire quantum industrial base is built, attracting capital and talent while simultaneously preventing the unauthorized proliferation of sensitive technologies.

The proactive implementation of strategic investment controls represents a critical layer of defense against the potential misuse of sensitive quantum technologies. These controls extend beyond simple export restrictions to encompass outbound investments – monitoring and potentially blocking capital flows that could empower adversaries in the development of quantum capabilities. Such measures aim to prevent the unintentional acceleration of competitor advancements or the funding of malicious actors seeking to undermine quantum security. By carefully scrutinizing foreign investments and capital flows related to quantum technologies, governments can mitigate risks associated with dual-use research, secure domestic innovation, and safeguard national interests without fully stifling international collaboration.

The pursuit of democratic resilience in the face of rapidly advancing quantum technologies necessitates a proactive approach to securing the ‘quantum industrial commons’ – the shared resources, infrastructure, and expertise vital for innovation. This paper proposes a framework centered on safeguarding this commons against malicious actors who might exploit quantum capabilities for disruptive purposes. While current analysis focuses on establishing the conceptual underpinnings of this security strategy – outlining necessary protections for intellectual property and strategic investments – it deliberately avoids premature quantification. The intention is to first build a robust, theoretically sound model for fostering a secure quantum ecosystem, recognizing that detailed quantitative results will emerge from subsequent, dedicated research and practical implementation of the proposed safeguards.

The pursuit of quantum technology, as detailed in the paper’s exploration of the ‘LSI Test’, echoes a fundamental challenge in all scientific advancement: the inherent ambiguity between potential and peril. Schrödinger himself observed, “The task is, not to satisfy desire, but to give up attachment.” This sentiment resonates deeply with the paper’s core argument for a balanced approach to fostering innovation within the quantum industrial commons. The LSI Test, advocating for a ‘least trade-restrictive’ framework, implicitly acknowledges the need to avoid overly zealous control that could stifle progress. Just as quantum states exist in superposition, so too does the future of quantum technology-a delicate balance requiring careful navigation to realize its benefits without succumbing to its risks. The paper’s emphasis on ‘deterrence by denial’ is a pragmatic attempt to manage that uncertainty, recognizing that complete control is an illusion.

What’s Next?

The proposition of a ‘Least Trade-Restrictive, Security-Sufficient, Innovation-Preserving’ (LSI) test offers a framework, but not a resolution. It clarifies the inherent tension between open innovation and strategic vulnerability in quantum technologies. The true challenge lies not in defining the test, but in its continuous, adaptive application. An engineer is responsible not only for system function but its consequences; this demands foresight beyond technical specifications. The LSI test, therefore, becomes a dynamic assessment, requiring constant recalibration as the quantum landscape evolves – and it will evolve at a pace that tests the limits of any governance structure.

Current discourse often frames national security solely in terms of defensive capabilities. However, the LSI test implicitly acknowledges a more nuanced reality: security is also a function of a robust, diverse, and distributed quantum industrial commons. The pursuit of absolute control, paradoxically, may prove the greatest vulnerability. The emerging Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) standards offer a specific, immediate application of this test, but the framework extends far beyond cryptography – encompassing materials science, manufacturing processes, and the very architectures of quantum computation.

Ultimately, the success of any such framework rests on a foundational principle: ethics must scale with technology. The LSI test, in effect, asks not simply can we build something, but should we, and under what conditions. This is not a purely technical question. It demands an ongoing, interdisciplinary dialogue encompassing not only scientists and engineers, but also policymakers, legal scholars, and, crucially, those who will be most affected by these powerful new technologies.

Original article: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.15051.pdf

Contact the author: https://www.linkedin.com/in/avetisyan/

See also:

2026-02-18 07:35