This is a really misleading article. It skims over lots of practical issues with FHE, such as the cost of the extra work which will severely limit its applicability, and more critically, the necessity to use the same key(!!) to encrypt/decrypt every input and output. It also conflates FHE with quantum-resistant encryption, simply because most FHE algorithms currently use lattice-based math, and a 2006 paper observed that no quantum algorithms were known that could outperform traditional computing for lattice math. Not a very strong claim, imo.
It goes on to grossly overstate the extent to which current IT systems are at risk as well as the extent to which FHE would even address actual IT threats. Plus, anytime anyone claims something is “provably secure”, they are leaving out crucial parts of the system, like the interface with humans or key rotation.
And then there’s the part where the author is a VP of business development at a company that makes FHE hardware. Sigh.
It goes on to grossly overstate the extent to which current IT systems are at risk as well as the extent to which FHE would even address actual IT threats. Plus, anytime anyone claims something is “provably secure”, they are leaving out crucial parts of the system, like the interface with humans or key rotation.
And then there’s the part where the author is a VP of business development at a company that makes FHE hardware. Sigh.