Sep 2026· Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Abstract
Quantum computing revolutionizes cybersecurity as both a potent defensive shield and an existential offensive threat to India’s digital sovereignty, imperilling Aadhaar, UPI, Digital India, and critical information infrastructure reliant on classical encryption. This analysis scrutinises its double-edged impact on national data-protection architectures, underscoring the urgency of proactive cryptographic migration under the National Quantum Mission amid accelerating quantum capabilities. Through systematic examination of technological vulnerabilities and regulatory imperatives, the inquiry integrates quantum threat modelling with doctrinal scrutiny of Indian legal precedents to forecast systemic risks and mitigation pathways. Central to the evaluation is a hybrid methodology combining algorithmic deconstruction of Shor’s Algorithm—capable of factoring large integers in polynomial time, thereby nullifying RSA and ECC protocols—with doctrinal analysis of landmark authorities, including Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India ((2017) 10 SCC 1; Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012), which elevated privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 and mandated robust safeguards now enforced by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) with penalties up to ₹250 crore for security lapses, alongside the Task Force Report on Implementation of Quantum Safe Ecosystem in India (DST, February 2026) directing PQC migration for Critical Information Infrastructure by 2029 to neutralise HNDL risks. Supplementary insights derive from IT Act, 2000 frameworks on encryption interception. Findings affirm QKD’s unconditional security for key exchange yet highlight pervasive retroactive decryption exposure, with lattice-based PQC demonstrating superior resistance under Grover’s speed-up constraints. Implications necessitate immediate cryptographic agility frameworks, elevated corporate liability under DPDP for quantum unpreparedness, and harmonised national standards to safeguard data sovereignty, avert catastrophic breaches in India’s digital economy, and harness quantum-enhanced defences for resilient infrastructures.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 8, 2026
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.