<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Exact quantum lower bound for Grover's problem · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0810.3647/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0810.3647/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Exact quantum lower bound for Grover's problem — mentioned by amluto</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47842976</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:0810.3647:47842976</guid><pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2026 00:17:06 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes and no. Grover&amp;#x27;s algorithm is provably optimal [0]. No quantum algorithm will ever find an n-bit key by queries to any reasonable sort of oracle faster than Grover&amp;#x27;s algorithm, and Grover&amp;#x27;s algorithm is way too slow to be a serious problem. But symmetric ciphers are not black boxes. They&amp;#x27;re mostly built on some variant of a Feistel network, which is a very nice construction for turning a messy function into an invertible function that, in a potentially very strong sense, acts like a cryptographically secure permutation. When I was in grad school, one project I contemplated but never spent…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/0810.3647/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
