Post-quantum readiness as a configuration change — not a rebuild.
The migration to post-quantum cryptography is a when, not an if. B5 Secure is built crypto-agile: today’s signing contract stays intact while the underlying primitives move to ML-KEM and ML-DSA, so adopting post-quantum is a configuration change rather than a re-architecture. The enforcement model never changes.
Harvest-now, decrypt-later makes post-quantum a present-tense problem.
Long-lived financial and identity data captured today can be decrypted once cryptographically relevant quantum computers arrive — the harvest-now, decrypt-later threat. Standards bodies have responded: NIST has finalized ML-KEM (FIPS 203) and ML-DSA (FIPS 204), and CNSA 2.0 sets migration timelines. The risk for most platforms is not the algorithms; it is that cryptography is hard-wired, so migration means a painful rebuild. B5 designs for agility so that migration is configuration.
Crypto-agility, with the contract held constant.
The signing and verification contract that B5 enforces stays the same; the primitives behind it are swappable. Lead with the outcome — provable, future-proof enforcement — not the internals.
Crypto-agile by design
Signing primitives are configurable, so moving to post-quantum signing is a configuration change while the authorization contract at the call site is unchanged.
ML-KEM and ML-DSA
Alignment to NIST’s finalized post-quantum standards — ML-KEM (FIPS 203) for key establishment and ML-DSA (FIPS 204) for signatures.
FIPS 140-3 Level 3 foundation
Keys live in a single-tenant Azure Managed HSM validated to FIPS 140-3 Level 3, with attestation proving provenance inside the hardware boundary.
CNSA 2.0-aligned migration
A documented migration posture aligned to CNSA 2.0 timelines, so the transition is planned, not reactive.
Standards-grounded
Grounded in the published cryptographic standards reviewers expect — NIST SP 800-57 key management guidance and the FIPS 203/204 suite.
Confidential computing ready
Customer-managed keys at rest, TLS 1.3 in transit, and confidential-computing options (AMD SEV-SNP, Intel TDX) for the most sensitive operations.
Where post-quantum readiness matters now.
Defend against harvest-now
Data signed or protected today stays defensible as primitives migrate, with no change to the enforcement model.
Provable, future-proof
Signing in an HSM with attestable provenance, ready to move to ML-DSA as policy and standards require.
Migration as configuration
A crypto-agile foundation means the post-quantum transition does not become a multi-quarter re-architecture.
Precise about cryptography — no overclaiming.
What the primitives do, stated correctly.
B5 leads with the enforcement and compliance outcome, not cryptographic internals. To be precise: authentication mechanisms prove identity and integrity; they are not, by themselves, encryption, and B5’s post-quantum posture concerns the agility to migrate signing and key-establishment primitives to the NIST-finalized standards. The HSM and FIPS 140-3 foundation is validated today; the ML-KEM / ML-DSA migration is a documented, standards-aligned posture.
Post-quantum readiness, without the rebuild.
See how crypto-agility keeps your enforcement contract constant while the primitives move to ML-KEM and ML-DSA — inside your boundary, on validated hardware.