PolicyBrief
S. 3312
119th CongressDec 2nd 2025
Quantum Readiness and Innovation Act of 2025
IN COMMITTEE

This act establishes guidance and a national strategy to help federal agencies and critical infrastructure sectors upgrade their computer systems to post-quantum cryptography to defend against future quantum computer attacks.

Gary Peters
D

Gary Peters

Senator

MI

LEGISLATION

Quantum Cybersecurity Bill Mandates Federal Upgrade Strategy to Protect Critical Systems by 2026

If you’ve heard the term ‘quantum computing’ and thought, “That sounds like a problem for future me,” guess again. The Quantum Readiness and Innovation Act of 2025 is the government’s way of saying the future is now, and they need to secure sensitive data before a quantum computer can crack current encryption methods like a cheap password. This bill sets deadlines for creating new, quantum-proof security standards and rolling them out across federal agencies and critical infrastructure sectors.

The Clock is Ticking: Creating Quantum-Proof Standards

The core of this bill is a mandate for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to move fast. Within 180 days of enactment, NIST must publish guidance for upgrading information systems to what’s called post-quantum cryptography (PQC). Think of PQC as the next generation of digital locks, specifically designed to withstand attacks from a quantum computer. Crucially, this guidance must be tailored for critical infrastructure sectors—the electric grid, water systems, financial networks—the stuff that keeps the lights on and your bank account working. This is a huge deal because it pushes private companies that run these essential services to start planning their security overhaul now, based on NIST’s new standards (SEC. 3).

The Federal Government’s Homework Assignment

Within 360 days, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) must deliver a comprehensive National Quantum Cybersecurity Upgrade Strategy (SEC. 4). This isn't just a paper exercise; it must define what a “cryptographically relevant quantum computer” actually looks like and set performance measures for agencies to follow when upgrading. This is the government making sure they have a clear, measurable roadmap for protecting high-impact systems—the federal information systems holding highly sensitive data (SEC. 2).

To make sure this plan actually works, the bill establishes a voluntary pilot program where federal agencies and their mission partners can get planning and technical support to upgrade at least one of their high-impact systems within 18 months of the program’s start. While voluntary, the goal is clearly to encourage high-risk entities to get their hands dirty and figure out the logistics of this massive upgrade early on. For the folks working inside federal agencies, this means a significant shift in IT budgets and planning as they inventory their data and start deploying new hardware and software (SEC. 4).

What This Means for the Rest of Us

While this bill is focused on government and critical infrastructure, the ripple effects are significant. When NIST publishes new PQC standards, the entire tech industry follows suit. If you work in cybersecurity, finance, or defense, you'll be dealing with these new standards sooner rather than later. For the average person, this is a proactive defense bill. Imagine if the security protocols protecting your hospital records, your tax data, or the power station were suddenly obsolete—that’s the threat this bill is trying to get ahead of. By standardizing PQC now, the government is ensuring that future attacks, even from super-powerful computers, don't compromise the systems we rely on daily.

One thing to watch is the cost. While the bill aims to standardize solutions and provide support, upgrading complex, high-impact systems is expensive, and those costs will be borne by the federal agencies and the private sector partners running critical infrastructure. Also, the strategy relies on defining exactly when a quantum computer becomes a real threat—the “cryptographically relevant” part. If that definition is too vague or shifts, it could either lead to unnecessary delays or, worse, a false sense of security (SEC. 4).