Survey Articles Open Access

Post-Quantum Cryptographic Migration in Hyperledger Fabric: A Systematic Survey of Latency, Throughput, and Identity Architecture Overhead

Rupsingh Puransingh Mathwale *
* Corresponding author: Rupsingh Puransingh Mathwale ( rpmathwale@sggs.ac.in )
Available online October 29, 2026
PDF

Abstract

Rapidly emerging quantum computing poses a threat to classical cryptosystems like ECDSA and RSA, which widely protect identity management, endorsement, and channel communications in permissioned enterprise distributed ledger network platforms. To the best of our knowledge, among the studies identified in our systematic literature search, we found no comprehensive PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic survey analyzing the multi-layer migration of Hyperledger Fabric to post-quantum cryptography (PQC). This paper follows a rigorous PRISMA 2020 methodology and provides a descriptive analysis of the overhead in the 67 included studies. At the identity layer, Membership Service Provider (MSP) X.509 certificate sizes grow from 867 bytes for ECDSA to 1,988 bytes for Kyber-512, 5,990 bytes for Dilithium-2, and 8,027 bytes for Dilithium-3. Using FIPS 203 (ML-KEM / Kyber-768) key encapsulation mechanisms (KEMs) instead of classical key exchanges in mutual TLS (mTLS) results in a 3.4-fold higher setup latency (from ~20 ms to ~68 ms), which is amortizable well over persistent peer-to-orderer gRPC streams. With ML-DSA-65 (Dilithium-3) signing, transaction endorsement latency is a light 0.226ms, followed by verification that adds ~2.7 ms per transaction. The survey provides a new integration roadmap to migrate permissioned blockchains to be quantum-secure, preventing quantum attacks.

Keywords

Hyperledger fabric post-quantum cryptography zero trust architecture performance benchmarking

Introduction

1.1. Broad Context and Motivation

In enterprise applications, where multiple organizations are involved, permissioned blockchain systems have become a fundamental resource for the infrastructure. Need to be distributively managed, tamper-evident, auditable, and have fine-grained access control . Among the distributed ledger technologies, Hyperledger Fabric’s modular architecture, membership-based identity model, and configurable architecture, which enable customization and integration with its various components, make it well-suited for use in finance, supply chain management, healthcare, and digital public infrastructure (DPI). The endorsement policies and separation between transaction execution and ordering and validation . Hyperledger Fabric relies heavily on classical public-key cryptography: the Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) and the Transport Layer Security (TLS), further to authenticate clients, generate X.509 identity certificates, sign endorsement proposals, and secure ECDHE key exchanges are used . With the quick progress of cryptographically relevant quantum computers (CRQCs), these classical primitives are under existential threat posed by . It has the ability to solve the integer factorization problem and the elliptic curve discrete logarithm problem (ECDLP) in polynomial time . This capability can be used to enable quantum attackers to derive private keys from public keys and generate digital signatures from public keys, manage, bypass client authentication, and decrypt historical encrypted communications under “Harvest Now, Decrypt Later” (HNDL) attack models . To fight these new quantum challenges, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has completed its first in a series of standards. The suite of Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) standards adds a new FIPS 203 (ML-KEM/CRYSTALS-Kyber) key encryption standard. In particular, the encapsulation mechanisms and FIPS 204 (ML-DSA/CRYSTALS-Dilithium) for lattice-based digital signatures . These standard primitives provide quantum-safe security based on the hardness of Module Learning With Errors, An integration of the (Module-LWE) and the Module Short Integer Solution (Module-SIS) problems in enterprises’ blockchain. The primitive swap is not sufficient for re-engineering the platform; instead, it needs a fundamental change in its architecture .

In response to these new quantum threats, NIST has completed the first set of cryptographic standards for Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC): FIPS 203 (ML-KEM / Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism Standard) for channel key exchange (CCKE); and FIPS 204 (ML-DSA / Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Standard) for lattice-based digital signatures .

1.2. Research Gap

Although various post-quantum cryptographic primitives and smart contract prototypes have been studied recently, there are very few works that combine both. The works that consider both combine post-quantum cryptographic primitives and smart contract prototypes. Despite the many different blockchain frameworks or proposals , there are still many open research questions about the system-level migration of permissioned blockchains:

  • Lack of Integrated Multi-Layer Evaluation: Most of the existing studies focus on the evaluation of PQC primitives individually or work on single layers (e.g., transaction signing) without a systemic analysis of the compounded overhead, within Fabric’s multi-layered architecture, such as Membership Service Providers (MSP), mTLS channel security, Transaction endorsement, Raft/BFT consensus ordering, and Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) integrations .

  • The size of the Signature Artifact Inflation: Post-quantum signatures and public keys are significantly larger. The signature will be 3,309 bytes (classical ECDSA) vs. 64-72 bytes (ECDSA DER) signature . The specific operating compromises between latency for verification of computations on the ledger and storage requirements on the ledger. The extent to which expansion/block size bloat is present in enterprise workloads is not well measured .

  • Overall lack of systematization in accordance with PRISMA 2020: No comprehensive and PRISMA 2020 compliant systematization A search protocol for a multi-string database that brings together the various search protocols in a clean taxonomy that connects the architectural entry to Hyperledger Fabric encompassing points of PQC.

To address these gaps, this systematic survey is based on a systematic and rigorous PRISMA 2020 methodology and evaluates post-quantum. Migration strategies, latency requirements, throughput overheads, and identity architecture overhead in Hyperledger Fabric. This work contributes in four main aspects:

  • We run a multi-stage literature search protocol—including Comprehensive Search (String A), High-Precision Search (String B) and Topic-Specific Sub-Queries (Strings C1-C5) which were conducted over five core taxonomy domains: MSP Identity Migration (C1), Channel KEM Security (C2), Transaction Endorsement (C3), Consensus and Storage Overhead (C4), and Zero Trust Integration (C5).

  • We developed a taxonomy of PQC migration points, analysing the Using a full stack BCCSP/MSP refactoring as compared to incremental over the entire fabric process. Comparing a full-stack BCCSP/MSP refactoring to an incremental refactoring over the entire Fabric process. Various application-layer microservice strategies have been proposed, such as .

  • Benchmarking empirical performance measures across classical and and the following PQC schemes: ECDSA, Kyber-512/768, Dilithium-2/3/5, Falcon-512/1024.

  • Migration from crypto-agility to auditability of ZKPs to Zero Trust continuous identity.

The rest of this survey article is structured as follows: Section 2 looks at the related works of the PQC and blockchain literature and compares them. Section 3 describes the search and queries (Strings A, B, C1-C5), research questions (RQs), and study selection criteria. In Section 4, technical results from the sub-domains (C1-C5) are analysed. Section 5 compares the performance metrics and the trade-offs among them. Section 6 concludes the survey and provides future aspects.

Complete Article

The complete article, including all figures, tables, equations and algorithms, is available in the official publication PDF.

Conclusion

A systematic survey was conducted, using the PRISMA 2020 methodology, to assess how the migration of Hyperledger Fabric is taking place towards post-quantum cryptography (PQC). The extracted results from the given works show that the connection setup overhead for post-quantum X.509 certificate expansion (up to 8027 B for Dilithium-3) and mTLS handshakes ( 68 ms for Kyber-768) is amortizable over long-lived gRPC channels. The latency for verifying certificates 2.71 ms for ML-DSA-65 and the 3.3 KB payload for the signatures induce a throughput (TPS) loss of 10-26%, with the greatest reduction occurring in Raft consensus. This indicates that ledger storage inflation is the main operational bottleneck, not cryptographic CPU execution time.

Future research will be able to assist with Q-ledgers and practical deployment by focusing on lattice-based signature aggregation, hardware-accelerated (FPGA/HSM) Polynomial Multiplication processes, and automated state database pruning to maintain long-term optimization in Q-ledgers.

References

  1. T. M. Fernandez-Carames and P. Fraga-Lamas, “Towards Post-Quantum Blockchain: A Review on Blockchain Cryptography Resistant to Quantum Computing Attacks, ” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 21091–21116, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2968985
  2. J.-W. Hu, “A Prototype for Post-Quantum Cryptographic Migration in Hyperledger Fabric, ” in 2025 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC). Pisa, Italy: IEEE, Jun. 2025, pp. 1–2, doi: 10.1109/ICBC64466.2025.11114457
  3. S. Abbas, A. Sultana, and G. Kaddoum, “Quantum-Safe Blockchain in Hyperledger Fabric, ” IEEE Networking Letters, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 61–65, Mar. 2025, doi: 10.1109/LNET.2024.3522966
  4. R. Kumar, “Quantum-Resistant Encryption Protocols for Real-Time Payment Authorization, ” in 2025 Tenth International Conference on Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (ICONSTEM). Chennai, India: IEEE, Nov. 2025, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/ICONSTEM65670.2025.11374432
  5. H. Gharavi, J. Granjal, and E. Monteiro, “Post-Quantum Blockchain Security for the Internet of Things: Survey and Research Directions, ” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1748–1774, 2024, doi: 10.1109/COMST.2024.3355222
  6. Y.-L. Gao, X.-B. Chen, Y.-L. Chen, Y. Sun, X.-X. Niu, and Y.-X. Yang, “A Secure Cryptocurrency Scheme Based on Post-Quantum Blockchain, ” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 27205–27213, 2018, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2827203
  7. V. Puneyani and K. V. Bhat, “Quantum-Resistant Blockchain Protocols for Secure Transactions, ” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 108984–108991, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3581955
  8. P. Udugahapattuwa, C. De Alwis, E. Zeydan, U. Wijewardhana, and M. Liyanage, “Quantum-Resistant Security for Blockchain-Enabled 6G Networks: A Comprehensive Review, ” IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 7, pp. 3253–3287, 2026, doi: 10.1109/OJCOMS.2026.3673993
  9. B. Bugra Sezer, S. Akleylek, and U. Nuriyev, “PP-PQB: Privacy-Preserving in Post-Quantum Blockchain-Based Systems: A Systematization of Knowledge, ” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 41382–41405, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3545943
  10. C.-Y. Li, X.-B. Chen, Y.-L. Chen, Y.-Y. Hou, and J. Li, “A New Lattice-Based Signature Scheme in Post-Quantum Blockchain Network, ” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 2026–2033, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2886554
  11. B. H. D. D. Priyanka, T. Santhini, S. G, V. P. V, S. Beevi, and N. Joshi, “Lightweight Blockchain Protocol for IoT Secure Data Transfer Using Lattice-Based Cryptography, ” in 2025 3rd International Conference on IoT, Communication and Automation Technology (ICICAT). Gorakhpur, India: IEEE, Dec. 2025, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/ICICAT68430.2025.11414728
  12. I. A. Kaddour, Y. Maleh, and M. Lahby, “Hardware Acceleration Techniques for Blockchain Cryptography: ECC and Post-Quantum Approaches–A Systematic Review, ” IEEE Access, vol. 14, pp. 131030–131056, 2026, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3726456
  13. K. Saxena and D. Bhatt, “Blockchain for IoT: A Comprehensive Survey on Security, Scalability, and Energy Efficiency (2020–2024), ” in 2025 International Conference on Intelligent and Secure Engineering Solutions (CISES). Greater Noida Gautam Budh Nagar, India: IEEE, Aug. 2025, pp. 663–667, doi: 10.1109/CISES66934.2025.11265105
  14. J. José Díaz Rivera, R. Vilalta, R. Muñoz, P. Alemany, and L. G. Renom, “Leveraging PQC and Blockchain for Secure and Verifiable SDN Controller Communication, ” in 2025 IEEE 11th International Conference on Network Softwarization (NetSoft). Budapest, Hungary: IEEE, Jun. 2025, pp. 567–572, doi: 10.1109/NetSoft64993.2025.11080638
  15. N. L. Ouadrassi, M. Said Boukhryss, A. Azmani, and K. J. Hassani, “Toward Quantum-Safe Permissioned Blockchains: Evaluating Hybrid ML-DSA-65/ECDSA Signatures on Hyperledger Fabric, ” IEEE Access, vol. 14, pp. 146672–146703, 2026, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3735938
  16. T. Zhukabayeva, A. U. Rehman, N. Tariq, and E. Benkhelifa, “Hyperledger Fabric Based Post Quantum Cryptography Healthcare Application Using Discrete Event Simulation, ” IEEE Access, pp. 192482–192493, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3513153
  17. B. Alothman, K. Allanqawi, A. Faraj, Z. Abouelhassan, Y. Buhamad, and E. Wadaan, “Towards a Post-Quantum-Resistant Blockchain Ledger to Mitigate EMV Chip Cloning Attacks, ” in 2025 7th International Conference on Blockchain Computing and Applications (BCCA). Durbovnic, Croatia: IEEE, Oct. 2025, pp. 851–856, doi: 10.1109/BCCA66705.2025.11229675
  18. S. Dolev, B. Guo, J. Niu, and Z. Wang, “SodsBC: A Post-Quantum by Design Asynchronous Blockchain Framework, ” IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 47–62, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1109/TDSC.2023.3243588
  19. J. Gomes, S. Khan, and D. Svetinovic, “Fortifying the Blockchain: A Systematic Review and Classification of Post-Quantum Consensus Solutions for Enhanced Security and Resilience, ” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 74088–74100, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3296559
  20. A. Castiglione, J. G. Esposito, V. Loia, M. Nappi, C. Pero, and M. Polsinelli, “Integrating Post-Quantum Cryptography and Blockchain to Secure Low-Cost IoT Devices, ” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1674–1683, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1109/TII.2024.3485796
  21. R. Saha, G. Kumar, T. Devgun, W. Buchanan, R. Thomas, M. Alazab, T.-H. Kim, and J. Rodrigues, “A Blockchain Framework in Post-Quantum Decentralization, ” IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, pp. 1–1, 2021, doi: 10.1109/TSC.2021.3116896
  22. R. Saha, G. Kumar, G. Geetha, Tai-Hoon-Kim, M. Alazab, R. Thomas, M. K. Rai, and J. J. P. C. Rodrigues, “The Blockchain Solution for the Security of Internet of Energy and Electric Vehicle Interface, ” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 7495–7508, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1109/TVT.2021.3094907
  23. H. Yi, “Secure Social Internet of Things Based on Post-Quantum Blockchain, ” IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 950–957, May 2022, doi: 10.1109/TNSE.2021.3095192
  24. Y. Wang and E. Shahril Ismail, “A Review on the Advances, Applications, and Future Prospects of Post-Quantum Cryptography in Blockchain and IoT, ” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 112962–112977, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3584473
  25. S. Ahmed, N. Tariq, F. A. Khan, and S. H. Chauhdary, “Post-Quantum DAG-Based Blockchain for Securing Vehicular Sensor Networks, ” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 5791–5799, Aug. 2026, doi: 10.1109/TCE.2026.3688933
  26. W. Ali, I. Ud Din, A. Almogren, A. Altameem, and J. J. P. C. Rodrigues, “Post-Quantum Blockchain-Based Secure Framework for Trustworthy Consumer Internet of Things, ” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 1915–1922, Feb. 2026, doi: 10.1109/TCE.2025.3632106
  27. H. Byeon, M. I. Khalaf, A. Zaidi, S. Banu Ahamed, S. Khan, P. P. Singh, H. Alsolai, K. Obidkhonov, and R. Gupta, “Post-Quantum Secure Blockchain Framework for Edge-Based Mobile Task Offloading in Consumer Electronics and IoTs, ” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 8407–8416, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.1109/TCE.2025.3595780
  28. M. Jiang, Y. Li, W. Susilo, and D. Duong, “Quantum-Safe Puncturable Signatures With Their Application in Blockchain, ” IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, vol. 19, pp. 2761–2770, 2024, doi: 10.1109/TIFS.2024.3353074
  29. P. Bagchi, A. Bisht, A. K. Das, N. Saxena, and M. S. Hossain, “Designing Quantum-Safe Lattice-Based Multi-Authority CP-ABE Scheme for Blockchain-Enabled IoT-Based Consumer Healthcare Electronics, ” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 4983–4994, May 2025, doi: 10.1109/TCE.2025.3552021
  30. P. Bagchi, R. Maheshwari, B. Bera, A. K. Das, Y. Park, P. Lorenz, and D. K. Y. Yau, “Public Blockchain-Envisioned Security Scheme Using Post Quantum Lattice-Based Aggregate Signature for Internet of Drones Applications, ” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 72, no. 8, pp. 10393–10408, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.1109/TVT.2023.3260579
  31. K.-C. Li, R.-H. Shi, W.-P. Guo, P.-B. Wang, and B.-S. Shao, “Dynamic Range Query Privacy-Preserving Scheme for Blockchain-Enhanced Smart Grid Based on Lattice, ” IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 1652–1664, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1109/TDSC.2023.3288228
  32. L. He, S. Rao, K. Tian, Y. Liu, J. Wang, S. Liu, and X. Lu, “A Post-Quantum Blockchain and Autonomous AI-Enabled Scheme for Secure Healthcare Information Exchange, ” IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, vol. 29, no. 9, pp. 6883–6891, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.1109/JBHI.2025.3579722
  33. D. Commey, S. G. Hounsinou, and G. V. Crosby, “Post-Quantum Secure Blockchain-Based Federated Learning Framework for Healthcare Analytics, ” IEEE Networking Letters, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 126–129, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.1109/LNET.2025.3563434
  34. R. Razdan and M. J. Nene, “Post Quantum Signature for Blockchain, ” in 2025 1st International Conference on Advancement in Futuristic Technologies (ICAFT). Belagavi, India: IEEE, Dec. 2025, pp. 1–5, doi: 10.1109/ICAFT66710.2025.11453249
  35. M. Chiranjeevi, N. Md. Bilal, J. A. I. S. Masood, N. S. Kalyan Chakravarthy, and N. Behera, “QUADRA - a Quantum-Resistant Distributed Resilient Architecture for Secure and Inclusive Digital Public Infrastructure, ” in 2025 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Distributed Systems Security (ICBDS). Kolhapur, India: IEEE, Oct. 2025, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/ICBDS67396.2025.11377033
  36. A. Alsaeed, S. Almowuena, and A. N. Alyahya, “BAAIoV: A Blockchain-Based Authentication and Authorization Framework for Secure and Reliable Internet of Vehicles Communication, ” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 150821–150837, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3601003
  37. M. A. Aleisa, “Blockchain-Enabled Zero Trust Architecture for Privacy-Preserving Cybersecurity in IoT Environments, ” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 18660–18676, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3529309
  38. J. R, Z. A. K. N, and Devi. S, “Implementation of a Zero Trust Edge Blockchain Framework for IoT Security: Integrating 6G Connectivity and LoRaWAN, ” in 2025 International Conference on Signal Processing, Computation, Electronics, Power and Telecommunication (IConSCEPT). Karaikal, India: IEEE, Dec. 2025, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/IConSCEPT66142.2025.11437031
  39. E. Zeydan, L. Blanco, J. Mangues-Bafalluy, S. S. Arslan, and Y. Turk, “Post-Quantum Blockchain-Based Decentralized Identity Management for Resource Sharing in Open Radio Access Networks, ” IEEE Transactions on Green Communications and Networking, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 895–909, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1109/TGCN.2024.3432689
  40. H. Ghaemi and D. Abbasinezhad-Mood, “Novel Blockchain-Integrated Quantum-Resilient Self-Certified Authentication Protocol for Cross-Industry Communications, ” IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 4493–4502, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1109/TNSE.2024.3428916
  41. E. Zeydan, J. Baranda, and J. Mangues-Bafalluy, “Post-Quantum Blockchain-Based Secure Service Orchestration in Multi-Cloud Networks, ” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 129520–129530, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3228823
  42. Y. Gong and B.-J. Hu, “A Quantum-Resistant Key Management Scheme Using Blockchain in C-V2X, ” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 16831–16844, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1109/TITS.2024.3421381
  43. X. Liu, H. Wang, W. Liu, L. Gong, and T. Liu, “APQE-CDA: A PUF-Based Post-Quantum End-to-End Cross-Domain Authenticated Key Agreement Protocol for IOD System, ” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 7441–7462, Feb. 2026, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2025.3639219
  44. G. Hao and J. Wu, “Efficient Post-Quantum Blockchain Transaction via Edge PUF-Enabled Persistent Verification in IoT, ” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1947–1962, Jan. 2026, doi: 10.1109/JIOT.2025.3627770
  45. H. M. S. Badar, S. Ahmed, N. I. Kajla, G. Fan, and C. Zhang, “Q-BLAISE: Quantum-Resilient Blockchain and AI-Enhanced Security Protocol for Smart Grid IoT, ” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 4959–4971, May 2025, doi: 10.1109/TCE.2025.3570969
  46. Y. Liu, B. Zhao, X. Lin, Z. Guan, D. Li, J. Liu, Q. Wu, W. Susilo, and R. H. Deng, “Quantum-Resistant Sharding Blockchain and Its Application in Secure Data Transmission, ” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 2732–2746, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.1109/JSAC.2025.3568043
  47. C. Sun, N. M. Mahfuz, and Y. Wang, “Quantum-Resistant Privacy and Auditing for Blockchain: A Lattice-Based Approach With Composable Security, ” IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 7610–7626, Jul. 2026, doi: 10.1109/TDSC.2026.3674809
  48. K. Sachdeva, “A Privacy-Focused, Post-Quantum-Oriented Digital Identity System Using Blockchain and Zero-Knowledge Proofs, ” IEEE Access, vol. 14, pp. 115040–115054, 2026, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3715111
  49. C. Näther, D. Herzinger, S.-L. Gazdag, J.-P. Steghöfer, S. Daum, and D. Loebenberger, “Migrating Software Systems Toward Post-Quantum Cryptography-A Systematic Literature Review, ” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 132107–132126, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3450306
  50. F. Alsulami, “Adaptive-AI-Zerotrust-Chain: AI-Centric Zero Trust Enforcement for IoT Security, ” in 2026 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Secure IoT, Assured and Trusted Computing (SATC). Houston, TX, USA: IEEE, Mar. 2026, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/SATC69565.2026.11542301
  51. K. Fayaz, V. Chakradhar, and U. D, “API Security with JWT Authentication and Reputation Based Monitoring System, ” in 2026 Fifth International Conference on Power, Control and Computing Technologies (ICPC2T). Raipur, India: IEEE, Mar. 2026, pp. 746–751, doi: 10.1109/ICPC2T68221.2026.11646386
  52. Y. Jang, H. Jang, and S. Lee, “A Quantum-Resistant and AI-Resilient Real-Time Keystroke Protection Framework With Blockchain-Backed Decentralized Identity, ” IEEE Access, vol. 14, pp. 57879–57894, 2026, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3680275
  53. M. Sharma, R. Zaidi, and V. Sharma, “A Practical Quantum-Resistant Security Evaluation Framework for Blockchain Infrastructure, ” in 2026 International Conference on Connected Intelligence for Industrial Applications (CI2A). Punjab, India: IEEE, Apr. 2026, pp. 1–6, doi: 10.1109/CI2A69097.2026.11577073
  54. A. Shahidinejad and J. Abawajy, “Decentralized Lattice-Based Device-to-Device Authentication for the Edge-Enabled IoT, ” IEEE Systems Journal, pp. 1–11, 2023, doi: 10.1109/JSYST.2023.3319280
  55. S. Xu, T. Wang, A. Sun, Y. Tong, Z. Ren, R. Zhu, and H. H. Song, “Post-Quantum Anonymous, Traceable and Linkable Authentication Scheme Based on Blockchain for Intelligent Vehicular Transportation Systems, ” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 12108–12119, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1109/TITS.2024.3383668
  56. D. Chaudhary, P. Santhi, M. S. P. Durgarao, A. Padmavathi, M. Mehedi Hassan, and B. Fahad Alkhamees, “Module Lattice-Based Post Quantum Secure Blockchain Empowered Authentication Framework for Autonomous Truck Platooning, ” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 105219–105233, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3434691
  57. R. R. Irshad, S. Hussain, I. Hussain, J. A. Nasir, A. Zeb, K. M. Alalayah, A. A. Alattab, A. Yousif, and I. M. Alwayle, “IoT-Enabled Secure and Scalable Cloud Architecture for Multi-User Systems: A Hybrid Post-Quantum Cryptographic and Blockchain-Based Approach Toward a Trustworthy Cloud Computing, ” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 105479–105498, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3318755
  58. S. P. Shanmugam, B. Subbiyan, K. Leelasankar, B. K. Mohanta, A. I. Awad, B. Mokhtar, and A. Y. Zomaya, “Lightweight Quantum-Resistant Blockchain-Based Key Agreement Scheme for IoV Communications, ” IEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society, vol. 7, pp. 3778–3799, 2026, doi: 10.1109/OJCOMS.2026.3679308
  59. A. Kumar, M. Malhotra, A. Anjali, and A. S. Yadav, “A Low-Latency Post-Quantum Group Authentication Framework for VANETs, ” IEEE Networking Letters, vol. 8, pp. 125–129, 2026, doi: 10.1109/LNET.2026.3666683
  60. F. Alanazi, M. Zareei, and M. García Martínez, “A Blockchain-Enabled Privacy-Preserving IoT Framework With Domain-Adaptive Anomaly Detection in Zero-Trust Environments, ” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 206883–206895, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3624661
  61. Z. Yang, H. Alfauri, B. Farkiani, R. Jain, R. Di Pietro, and A. Erbad, “A survey and comparison of post-quantum and quantum blockchains, ” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 967–1002, 2023, doi: 10.1109/COMST.2023.3325761
  62. X. Ren, M. Xu, D. Niyato, J. Kang, Z. Xiong, C. Qiu, H. Yao, and X. Wang, “Building resilient web 3.0 infrastructure with quantum information technologies and blockchain: an ambilateral view, ” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 112, no. 11, pp. 1686–1715, 2025, doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2024.3520803
  63. Y. Baseri, A. Hafid, Y. Shahsavari, D. Makrakis, and H. Khodaiemehr, “Blockchain security risk assessment in quantum era, migration strategies and proactive defense, ” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 2025, doi: 10.1109/COMST.2025.3621113
21 9

Similar Articles

1-10 of 18

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.