Skip to content
—
QuantascanAlpha

NIST post-quantum standards

What the 2024 NIST post-quantum standards are, and where QRL's signature schemes fit in.

5 min readUpdated 2026-06-20

On this page▾

QRL didn't invent its cryptography in a vacuum. The post-quantum signatures it uses are part of a global standardisation effort led by NIST (the US National Institute of Standards and Technology). Knowing the landscape helps put QRL's choices in context.

Why a standardisation effort was needed

For decades, the cryptography securing the internet (RSA, elliptic curves) was a known quantity. The looming quantum threat changed that: the world needed replacement algorithms believed safe against quantum computers, vetted in the open rather than chosen by any single vendor.

So in 2016 NIST launched a public competition. Cryptographers worldwide submitted candidate algorithms, attacked each other's designs for years, and the strongest survivors were standardised. The first finalised standards landed in 2024.

The 2024 standards

The headline finalised standards are:

  • FIPS 203 — ML-KEM (from CRYSTALS-Kyber): for key encapsulation / key exchange.
  • FIPS 204 — ML-DSA (from CRYSTALS-Dilithium): for digital signatures.
  • FIPS 205 — SLH-DSA (from SPHINCS+): a hash-based signature, as a conservative alternative.

For a blockchain, the relevant one is signatures — FIPS 204, ML-DSA.

Where QRL fits

QRL uses two post-quantum signatures, one on each chain, and both line up with recognised standards:

  • QRL 2.0 → ML-DSA-87, the highest (level-5) parameter set of ML-DSA / FIPS 204. This is the modern, NIST-standardised lattice signature.
  • QRL Legacy → XMSS, a hash-based signature standardised earlier as RFC 8391 and reflected in NIST's guidance on stateful hash-based signatures (SP 800-208).

In other words, QRL Legacy was an early adopter of a hash-based standard, and QRL 2.0 adopts the newest lattice-based one. Both sit firmly within the standardised post-quantum toolbox rather than relying on home-grown schemes.

What standardisation does and doesn't promise

Standardisation means an algorithm survived years of expert scrutiny and is recommended for real-world use. It does not mean it is proven unbreakable — no practical scheme is. As with all post-quantum cryptography, the claim is "no known efficient attack," backed by intense public analysis. That's the strongest assurance modern cryptography offers.

Where to go next

FAQ about NIST post-quantum standards

Common questions about this page
What are the NIST post-quantum standards?
In 2024, NIST published its first finalised post-quantum cryptography standards, including ML-KEM (FIPS 203) for key exchange and ML-DSA (FIPS 204) for digital signatures. They are the result of a multi-year, public competition to find algorithms believed secure against quantum computers.
Which standard does QRL use?
QRL 2.0 signs with ML-DSA-87, the highest security level of ML-DSA (FIPS 204). QRL Legacy uses XMSS, a hash-based signature standardised earlier as RFC 8391, which is also recognised in NIST's stateful-hash-based guidance.
Are these standards proven unbreakable?
No cryptography is proven unbreakable. The NIST standards are the schemes that survived years of public analysis and are believed secure against both classical and quantum attacks. Standardisation reflects strong confidence, not a mathematical guarantee.
← Back to Learn