Responsible Quantum and AI Security Frontiers

Abstract

The panel examined how emerging “responsible quantum” frameworks can guide the secure, ethical, and trustworthy development of quantum technologies, drawing lessons from responsible AI governance. Participants debated the mutual reinforcement of AI and quantum computing, the looming cryptographic threats posed by quantum‑capable machines, and pragmatic pathways for post‑quantum cryptography (PQC) adoption across governments, industry, and research institutions. The discussion also covered national strategies in the UK and India, sector‑specific opportunities (healthcare, finance, logistics, defense), and the importance of international standards and collaboration to foster responsible quantum deployment worldwide.

Detailed Summary

1. Opening Remarks & Context‑Setting

Prof. Manish Gangwar (moderator) opened the session, thanking the AI Impact Summit and METI for bringing together a “defining technology inflection point” where AI and quantum computing converge. He cited global AI adoption statistics (≈ 78 % of organisations use AI; projected AI market ≈ US $1.8trillionby2030)andnotedtheparallelriseincybercrime.Hehighlightedtherapidcommercialisationofquantumcomputing(Google,Microsoft,Amazon)andtheIndianNationalQuantumMission’sUS$750 million funding.

He framed the core question: How can we evolve quantum technology responsibly, rather than simply “faster?”

---

2. Introducing the Panel

2.1 Sachin Kakkar (Google India)

• Background – 24 years in R&D, 12 patents, former trust lead at LinkedIn & Microsoft. Holds an AI/ML MSc (Georgia Tech) and an MBA (IIM).
• Role – Leads privacy, safety, and security for Google India, building solutions that protect billions of users.

2.2 Oliver B (UK Government)

• Background – Member of the UK Government Cyber Security Technical Standards Team (cross‑departmental: FCDO, DSTI, NCSC).
• Role – Engages in global standard‑development organisations, shaping cyber‑security standards for AI and post‑quantum cryptography.

2.3 Vinayak Godse (DSCI)

• Background – Senior figure in the Data Security Council of India, active in the BFSI (Banking, Financial Services & Insurance) sector.

2.4 Rama Devi Lanka (NITI Aayog)

• Background – Senior consultant with METI‑IO; previously led emerging‑technology initiatives for the Telangana government.

2.5 Dr. Shruti Mantri (ISB)

• Background – Faculty at Indian School of Business, specialising in responsible AI and governance frameworks.

---

3. AI‑Quantum Synergy

Sachin Kakkar (to Oliver) described a feedback loop between AI and quantum computing:

1. Quantum‑enabled data generation – Quantum simulators produce high‑fidelity physical‑system data (e.g., battery chemistry, molecular structures).
2. AI model consumption – AI consumes this data to optimise energy usage, design new materials, etc.
3. AI‑driven quantum‑hardware optimisation – AI assists engineers in stabilising quantum processors (system‑control, error‑correction).

He termed this a “flywheel effect” where each technology amplifies the other’s capabilities.

Oliver B added a “doom‑and‑gloom” perspective, reminding the audience that both AI and quantum systems introduce novel cyber‑risk vectors (data‑poisoning, prompt‑injection, quantum‑breakable cryptography). He stressed the need for collective risk mitigation.

---

4. Quantum‑Induced Cryptographic Risks

4.1 Threat Landscape

• Quantum‑relevant computers could break current public‑key algorithms (RSA, ECC) in seconds, exposing long‑lived data stored today.
• Attackers may harvest encrypted data now and decrypt it later once quantum hardware matures.

4.2 Immediate Mitigations (Google’s Approach)

Sachin Kakkar outlined Google’s hybrid layered encryption strategy:

Phase	Action	Rationale
1️⃣ Inventory	Identify all data/assets requiring long‑term confidentiality.	Clarifies protection scope.
2️⃣ Dual‑layer	Deploy classic encryption plus post‑quantum‑resistant (PQR) algorithms.	Provides a “safety net” while legacy systems remain functional.
3️⃣ Software‑centric upgrade	Use library‑based solutions (e.g., Tink) that auto‑upgrade cryptographic primitives without hardware changes.	Avoids costly hardware swaps; keeps performance stable.
4️⃣ Performance monitoring	Track key‑size growth, bandwidth, and throughput to prevent slowdown.	Ensures operational continuity.

He warned about key‑size explosion (PQC keys are larger) and the need to verify that existing infrastructure can handle the increased load.

---

5. UK Government Roadmap

Oliver B presented the UK’s three‑milestone timeline for PQC migration:

Milestone	Target Year	Expected Deliverable
2028	Define migration goals, complete cryptographic estate discovery, begin early migration planning.
2031	Execute high‑priority PQC migrations; refine full‑scale rollout roadmap.
2035	Complete migration of all critical systems to PQC.

He emphasized that these milestones are aligned with international standards (NIST, IETF, ETSI) rather than hardware upgrades, and that government‑level coordination (clear roles, sector‑specific guidance) is essential.

---

6. India’s National Quantum Strategy

Rama Devi Lanka (NITI Aayog) outlined India’s “quantum‑ready nation” vision:

• Five priority sectors – Defense & aerospace (quantum communications/sensing), Logistics (quantum optimisation for “last‑mile” delivery), Quantum peripherals, Finance/Banking (fraud detection, risk analytics), Pharma & Healthcare (molecular simulation, precision medicine).
• Roadmap – A 10‑year plan (target vision for 2035) that couples research infrastructure (National Quantum Computing Centre, quantum test‑beds) with sector‑specific pilots (e.g., partnership with IIIT‑Hyderabad for health‑care quantum road‑mapping).
• Use‑case illustration – A remote‑village child with a rare genetic disease could receive personalised quantum‑simulated drug via a “digital hospital” at a primary‑care centre.

Dr. Shruti Mantri complemented this by stressing proactive governance:

• National PQC test‑beds for critical infrastructure.
• Mandating quantum‑readiness for public‑sector entities.
• Developing Indian‑specific standards while contributing to global bodies (ISO, IEC).
• Democratising access – Provide quantum compute credits to startups, academia, and research labs (similar to AI‑compute platforms).
• Skilling & data‑framework updates – Upskill workforce; formulate new data‑lifespan policies that account for quantum memory capabilities.

---

7. Industry & BFSI Survey Insights

Vinayak Godse presented results from a 2025 DSCI‑BFSI survey (≈ 180 banks & financial institutions):

• Awareness Gap – ~ 70 % of respondents rated their quantum knowledge as low to moderate.
• Timeline Uncertainty – 57.5 % could not specify when quantum will become operationally relevant to them.
• Risk Concern – 87.5 % expressed anxiety about quantum‑driven cyber threats.
• Readiness Score – Average preparedness rating of 1/5 for defending against quantum‑based attacks.

Vinayak concluded that industry‑government collaboration is crucial to accelerate both awareness and PQC adoption.

---

8. Practical Migration Path (Four‑Phase Model)

Shruti Mantri (summarising Sachin’s points) proposed a concise four‑phase migration framework:

1. Data Inventory – Identify long‑lived, high‑value data needing quantum‑resilient protection.
2. Safety‑Net Layering – Apply classic encryption plus PQC algorithms (no immediate switch‑off).
3. Standards Adoption – Follow NIST‑published deployment guides; use vetted libraries (e.g., Tink).
4. Incremental Roll‑out – Upgrade software components via libraries, monitoring performance impacts (key size, bandwidth).

She highlighted that software‑only upgrades can keep systems running for years while gradually enhancing security.

---

9. Challenges in the Indian Ecosystem

Vinayak Godse (follow‑up) identified two major hurdles:

• Quantum‑hardware cost – Cloud access costs US $2‑8 k per month; waiting lists limit experimentation.
• Software & Algorithmic Gap – India lags in quantum‑ready algorithms, risking a “hardware‑only” advantage without usable applications.

He mentioned a forthcoming quantum computer at the SEDAC facility (expected Q3 2026) that will be opened to researchers and industry, aiming to bridge the hardware gap.

---

10. International Collaboration & Standards

10.1 Google’s Open‑Source Contribution

Sachin Kakkar highlighted Google’s Secure‑AI framework (open‑source) and their participation in NIST competitions, affirming that transparent, shared resources accelerate global PQC readiness.

10.2 UK‑India Coordination

Oliver B called for deeper UK‑India alignment through:

• Participation in global standards bodies (IETF, ETSI, NIST).
• Joint test‑beds and knowledge‑exchange programmes.

He remarked that differences in national implementation timelines are acceptable as long as each nation adheres to globally recognised standards.

10.3 Broader Multilateral Outlook

• Ramana (NITI Aayog) stressed that public‑private partnerships (e.g., Quantum Valley Corp. with IBM, TCS, L&T) are essential for scaling quantum solutions.
• Binak (national security perspective) warned of geopolitical secrecy surrounding quantum capabilities and advocated for a global responsible‑quantum framework to prevent misuse.

---

11. Closing Reflections

The moderator summed up the key themes:

• Quantum computing offers unprecedented problem‑solving power (drug discovery, logistics, finance) but simultaneously endangers current cryptographic guarantees.
• Responsible governance must be proactive, blending policy, standards, industry best‑practices, and open collaboration.
• The “quantum‑ready” mission is a global endeavour; no single nation can secure the ecosystem alone.

The session ended with a brief group photograph, followed by gratitude to the organizers and a token of appreciation for the panelists.

Key Takeaways

• Quantum‑AI Feedback Loop – Quantum simulators generate high‑quality data for AI models; AI, in turn, optimises quantum hardware and control systems.
• Hybrid Encryption is the Immediate Path – Deploy classic cryptography alongside post‑quantum algorithms (layered approach) to protect long‑lived data without disrupting existing services.
• UK Migration Milestones – 2028 (inventory & planning), 2031 (high‑priority rollout), 2035 (full PQC migration); focus on software‑centric upgrades rather than hardware replacement.
• India’s 10‑Year Quantum Roadmap – Prioritises defense, logistics, finance, quantum peripherals, and health‑care; targets a quantum‑enabled health system by 2035.
• Industry Readiness Gap – 70 % of Indian BFSI respondents report low quantum knowledge; overall preparedness for quantum‑driven attacks scores 1/5.
• Four‑Phase Migration Framework – (1) Data inventory, (2) dual‑layer encryption, (3) NIST‑aligned standards, (4) library‑driven incremental rollout.
• Open‑Source & Standards Are Crucial – Google’s Secure‑AI framework, Tink library, and participation in NIST/IETF/ETSI accelerate global PQC adoption.
• Public‑Private & International Partnerships – Successful quantum deployment requires coordinated efforts across governments, academia, and industry, both domestically (e.g., Quantum Valley Corp.) and internationally (UK‑India standards work).
• Need for a Global Responsible‑Quantum Framework – To mitigate geopolitical risks and prevent misuse, a multilateral governance model for quantum technologies is recommended.
• Skilling, Democratisation, and Benchmarking – National programs must up‑skill the workforce, provide affordable quantum compute access, and develop India‑specific benchmarks while contributing to global standards.

These points capture the panel’s consensus that responsible quantum adoption hinges on early, layered security measures, clear national roadmaps, and robust international collaboration.

See Also:

• ai-for-economic-development-and-social-good
• responsible-ai-at-scale-governance-integrity-and-cyber-readiness-for-a-changing-world
• welfare-for-all-ensuring-equitable-ai-growth-across-the-worlds-largest-and-oldest-democracies
• ai-innovators-exchange-accelerating-innovation-through-startup-and-industry-synergy
• democratizing-ai-resources-in-india
• ai-for-democracy-reimagining-governance-in-the-age-of-intelligence