The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Quantum of QUIC: Dissecting Cryptography with Post-Quantum Insights
Open accessAbstract
QUIC is a new network protocol standardized in 2021. It was designed to replace the TCP/TLS stack and is based on UDP. The most current web standard HTTP/3 is specifically designed to use QUIC as transport protocol. QUIC claims to provide secure and fast transport with low-latency connection establishment, flow and congestion control, reliable delivery, and stream multiplexing. To achieve the security goals, QUIC enforces the usage of TLS 1.3. It uses authenticated encryption with additional data (AEAD) algorithms to not only protect the payload but also parts of the header. The handshake relies on asymmetric cryptography, which will be broken with the introduction of powerful quantum computers, making the use of post-quantum cryptography inevitable. This paper presents a detailed evaluation of the impact of cryptography on QUIC performance. The high-performance QUIC implementations LSQUIC, quiche, and MsQuic are evaluated under different aspects. We break symmetric cryptography down to the different security features. To be able to isolate the impact of cryptography, we implemented a NOOP AEAD algorithm which leaves plaintext unaltered. We show that QUIC performance increases by 10 to 20 % when removing packet protection. The header protection has negligible impact on performance, especially for AES ciphers. We integrate post-quantum cryptographic algorithms into QUIC, demonstrating its feasibility without major changes to the QUIC libraries by using a TLS library that implements post-quantum algorithms. Kyber, Dilithium, and FALCON are promising candidates for post-quantum secure QUIC, as they have a low impact on the handshake duration. Algorithms like SPHINCS+with larger key sizes or more complex calculations significantly impact the handshake duration and cause additional issues in our measurements.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Packet delay seems to affect both HQC and BIKE equally.”
From Status report on the fourth round of the NIST post-quantum cryptography standardization process (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Generally, when network conditions (e.g., transmission rates and packet loss) are ignored or sufficiently good, HQC results in faster handshakes.”
From Status report on the fourth round of the NIST post-quantum cryptography standardization process (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“In contrast, when network conditions are sufficiently bad, BIKE outperforms HQC.”
From Status report on the fourth round of the NIST post-quantum cryptography standardization process (2025) · cites this paper as [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search
Grover, L. K. (1996) · Proceedings of the twenty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing - STOC '96 · doi:10.1145/237814.237866 · Cited by 8,830
Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer
Shor, P. W. (1999) · SIAM Review · doi:10.1137/s0036144598347011 · Cited by 3,904
Status report on the third round of the NIST Post-Quantum Cryptography Standardization process
Alagic, G., Apon, D., Cooper, D., Dang, Q., Dang, T., Kelsey, J., Lichtinger, J., Liu, Y.-K., Miller, C., Moody, D., et al. (2022) · doi:10.6028/nist.ir.8413-upd1 · Cited by 301
Research works printed but not linked: 34
- Iyengar, 2021, QUIC: A UDP-Based Multiplexed and Secure Transport, 10.17487/RFC9000 · DOI
- Thomson, 2021, Using TLS to Secure QUIC, 10.17487/RFC9001 · DOI
- 2020, A non-TLS standard is needed
- 2024, Historic TLS Discussion
- 10.23919/IFIPNetworking57963.2023.10186365 · DOI
- 2023, Post-Quantum Cryptography Standardization
- Rescorla, 2018, The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3, 10.17487/RFC8446 · DOI · Paper page
- Gueron, 2010, Intel® Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) New Instructions Set
- Nir, 2015, ChaCha20 and Poly1305 for IETF Protocols, 10.17487/RFC7539 · DOI
- 2024, Algorithms in liboqs
- Westerbaan, 2024, The state of the post-quantum Internet
- Bernstein, 2008, Post Quantum Cryptography
- 2024, LiteSpeed Tech
- 2024, quiche
- 2024, MsQuic
- 10.1145/3405796.3405827 · DOI
- 2024, Quant
- 2024, Quicly
- 2024, picoquic
- 2024, mvfst
- 10.1145/3606464.3606474 · DOI
- 10.1145/3442381.3450103 · DOI
- 10.1145/3405796.3405828 · DOI
- 10.1145/3624354.3630585 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/978-3-031-22390-7_6 · DOI
- 10.1145/3405796.3405826 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-031-56252-5_13 · DOI
- 10.1109/LCN58197.2023.10223395 · DOI
- 2024, BoringSSL
- 2024, OpenSSL
- Kempf, 2024, Publication of modified TLS Libraries
- 2024, BoringSSL
- 2024, FIPS 203, Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism Standard
- Stebila, 2023, Hybrid key exchange in TLS 1.3
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Status report on the fourth round of the NIST post-quantum cryptography standardization process
Alagic, G., Bros, M., Ciadoux, P., Cooper, D., Dang, Q., Dang, T., Kelsey, J., Lichtinger, J., Liu, Y.-K., Miller, C., et al. (2025) · doi:10.6028/nist.ir.8545 · Cited by 211
Metadata
- Authors
- Kempf, M., Gauder, N., Jaeger, B., Zirngibl, J., & Carle, G.
- Affiliations
- Technical University of Munich (DE)
- Venue
- 2024 IFIP Networking Conference (IFIP Networking)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2024-06-03
- Pages
- 195-203
- OpenAlex
- W4401609342
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 6.57
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IFIP Networking Conference (IFIP Networking) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- German Research Foundation (CA595/13-1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Traffic and Congestion Control
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptographic Implementations and Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Cryptography and Data Security
- Keywords
- QUIC, post-quantum cryptography, TLS 1.3, handshake latency, cryptographic overhead, symmetric encryption, Kyber, Dilithium, falcons, SPHINCS+, HTTP/3, Quiché, quantum computing threats
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Quantum of QUIC: Dissecting Cryptography with Post-Quantum Insights. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.23919/ifipnetworking62109.2024.10619916
- The paper
- Kempf, M., Gauder, N., Jaeger, B., Zirngibl, J., & Carle, G. (2024). A Quantum of QUIC: Dissecting Cryptography with Post-Quantum Insights. 2024 IFIP Networking Conference (IFIP Networking). https://doi.org/10.23919/ifipnetworking62109.2024.10619916