Post-quantum cryptographic policy frameworks for medical institutions
M. M. Thoratmmthorat31@gmail.comDepartment of AnatomyKrishna Institute of Medical SciencesKrishna Vishwa Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University)Karad, Maharashtra, 415539, IndiaView full profile → , Mukesh Parasharregistrar@niu.edu.inSchool of Business ManagementNoida International UniversityGreater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, 201312, IndiaView full profile → , Mourya Murlidhermurli_cool9@vardhaman.orgDepartment of Computer Science and EngineeringVardhaman College of EngineeringShamshabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, 501218, IndiaView full profile → , V. B. Gawaivbgawai@aissmscoe.comDepartment of Electronics & Telecommunication EngineeringAISSMS College of EngineeringPune, Maharashtra, 411001, IndiaView full profile → , Pradnya Yuvraj Patilpradnya.patil1@vit.eduDepartment of Electronics and Telecommunication EngineeringVishwakarma Institute of TechnologyPune, Maharashtra, 411037, IndiaView full profile → , J. Jayannanjayannan@maher.ac.inDepartment of General MedicineMeenakshi Medical College Hospital and Research InstituteMeenakshi Academy of Higher Education and ResearchKanchipuram, Tamil Nadu, 631552, IndiaView full profile →
* Corresponding author · click or hover a name for details
- Received:
- 01 Mar 2026
- Published Online:
- 31 Oct 2026
- Article type:
- Research Article
- Language:
- EN
- Article no.:
- JIOS-2502
- Pages:
- 3777–3788
Abstract
With the progress of quantum computing, medical institutions that use classical public-key cryptography to secure the confidentiality of long-lasting and delicate healthcare information are facing great security challenges. This research aims to suggest a policy framework for Post-Quantum Cryptographic Policy (PQCP) to facilitate systematic shift of healthcare infrastructures to quantum resistant infrastructure security. It seamlessly combines cryptographic asset discovery, quantum-risk assessment, asset prioritization, crypto-agility, hybrid cryptographic migration, secure key management, governance, compliance monitoring, and ongoing security evaluation. It covers electronic health records, healthcare platforms in the cloud, medical imaging, telemedicine applications and resource-limited Internet of Medical Things devices. A risk-oriented migration strategy gives institutions the ability to prioritize systems based on the amount of data in a system, the vulnerabilities of the cryptographic functions used, the clinical criticality of the system, and the length of time the information must be kept confidential. There are hybrid (classical and post-quantum) mechanisms for gradual migration and interoperability or clinical continuity. Finally, the suggested framework offers a structured approach to enhance the preparedness of healthcare institutions, adherence to regulations, resilience against cryptographic attacks, and long-term protection of healthcare information from the evolving quantum cybersecurity landscape.
Keywords
Subject Classifications
References
[1] Y. Baseri, V. Chouhan, and A. Hafid, “Navigating quantum security risks in networked environments: A comprehensive study of quantum-safe network protocols,” Comput. Secur., vol. 142, Art. no. 103883 (2024), doi: 10.1016/j.cose.2024.103883.
[2] M. Papaioannou, M. Karageorgou, G. Mantas, V. Sucasas, I. Essop, J. Rodriguez, and D. Lymberopoulos, “A survey on security threats and countermeasures in Internet of Medical Things (IoMT),” Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol., vol. 33, no. 6, Art. no. e4049 (2022), doi: 10.1002/ett.4049.
[3] K. Cherkaoui Dekkaki, I. Tasic, and M.-D. Cano, “Exploring post-quantum cryptography: Review and directions for the transition process,” Technologies, vol. 12, no. 12, Art. no. 241 (2024), doi: 10.3390/technologies12120241.
[4] M. Uddin, M. Muzammal, M. K. Hameed, I. T. Javed, B. Alamri, and N. Crespi, “CBCIoT: A consensus algorithm for blockchain-based IoT applications,” Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 22, Art. no. 11011 (2021), doi: 10.3390/app112211011.
[5] N. Ahmed, L. Zhang, and A. Gangopadhyay, “A survey of post-quantum cryptography support in cryptographic libraries,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Quantum Comput. Eng. (QCE), pp. 906–917 (2025), doi: 10.1109/QCE65121.2025.00102.
[6] W. Yang, S. Wang, H. Cui, Z. Tang, and Y. Li, “A review of homomorphic encryption for privacy-preserving biometrics,” Sensors, vol. 23, no. 7, Art. no. 3566 (2023), doi: 10.3390/s23073566.
[7] D. Joseph, R. Misoczki, M. Manzano, J. Tricot, F. Dominguez Pinuaga, O. Lacombe, S. Leichenauer, J. Hidary, P. Venables, and R. Hansen, “Transitioning organizations to post-quantum cryptography,” Nature, vol. 605, no. 7909, pp. 237–243 (2022), doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04623-2.
[8] S. K. Sahu and K. Mazumdar, “State-of-the-art analysis of quantum cryptography: Applications and future prospects,” Front. Phys., vol. 12, Art. no. 1456491 (2024), doi: 10.3389/fphy.2024.1456491.
[9] N. Babbar, A. K. Sharma, R. K. Saini, and N. K. Verma, “Mathematical foundations of secure AI: Homomorphic encryption for distributed learning systems,” J. Discrete Math. Sci. Cryptogr., vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 2967–2975 (2025), doi: 10.47974/JDMSC-2441.
[10] S. Li, Y. Chen, L. Chen, J. Liao, C. Kuang, K. Li, W. Liang, and N. Xiong, “Post-quantum security: Opportunities and challenges,” Sensors, vol. 23, no. 21, Art. no. 8744 (2023), doi: 10.3390/s23218744.
[11] M. Ebrahim, A. Hafid, and E. Elie, “Blockchain as privacy and security solution for smart environments: A survey,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.08901 (2022), doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2203.08901.
[12] H. Sebestyen, D. E. Popescu, and R. D. Zmaranda, “A literature review on security in the Internet of Things: Identifying and analysing critical categories,” Computers, vol. 14, no. 2, Art. no. 61 (2025), doi: 10.3390/computers14020061.
