Quantum computing still feels abstract to many organizations—powerful and inevitable, but safely “down the road.” Yet pressure to accelerate post-quantum cryptography (PQC) timelines is building faster than most teams expected. Not because quantum computers are suddenly here, but because leaders are confronting how difficult it will be to change cryptography at scale.

Recent recommendations from the U.S. Department of War, calling for comprehensive cryptography inventories and formal ownership of PQC migration, are a clear signal of that shift. While the guidance is government-specific, the underlying message is universal: You can’t migrate to post-quantum cryptography if you don’t know where cryptography lives today—or how much technical debt it’s buried under.

Why PQC timelines are compressing

For years, post-quantum planning was framed as a distant concern. Teams were encouraged to monitor standards development, experiment cautiously, and revisit the issue once timelines became clearer. 

That posture is no longer sufficient.

With post-quantum standards now finalized, uncertainty about which algorithms to prepare for has largely disappeared. At the same time, policy guidance is shifting from research to readiness, signaling that organizations are expected to act rather than observe. Layer in growing concern around “harvest now, decrypt later” attacks, and encrypted data created today starts to look like a long-term liability, not a closed chapter.

Taken together, these forces are compressing timelines. Even if quantum-capable adversaries are still years away, leaders are recognizing that the effort required to replace cryptography across complex, interconnected environments will take years as well. That realization is what’s driving urgency—not panic, but realism.

Cryptography is everywhere—and rarely documented

Most organizations know they use cryptography. Far fewer can describe it with confidence.

Leaders often struggle to answer basic questions: where asymmetric keys are in use, which systems depend on long-lived certificates or embedded secrets, and which applications can realistically be updated without major disruption. Ownership is often unclear as well, split across security teams, platform engineers, IT operations, and third-party vendors.

Part of the challenge is scale. Cryptography now underpins cloud services, APIs, identity systems, DevOps pipelines, mobile platforms, IoT devices, and operational technology. It’s embedded deep inside systems that were never designed for frequent cryptographic change. Over time, that sprawl turns cryptography into critical infrastructure that few people can fully see.

This is why crypto inventory has become foundational to post-quantum readiness. Without visibility, migration planning becomes guesswork, and guesswork doesn’t survive first contact with reality.

CBOMs bring clarity to an opaque problem

One of the most effective ways to regain that visibility is through Cryptographic Bills of Materials (CBOMs). Much like SBOMs improved transparency into software dependencies, CBOMs provide structured insight into how cryptography is actually implemented across an environment.

By documenting which algorithms are in use, where keys and certificates are stored, and how cryptographic controls are configured, CBOMs turn an abstract risk discussion into something concrete. They allow organizations to assess which systems are quantum-vulnerable, which are upgradeable, and which represent long-term constraints.

Just as importantly, CBOMs create a shared reference point. Security teams, engineers, and leadership can align around facts rather than assumptions, enabling prioritization instead of paralysis. Without that common understanding, PQC programs often stall before meaningful progress begins.

Cryptographic technical debt is the real blocker

The hardest part of post-quantum migration won’t be updating modern systems designed with crypto-agility in mind. It will be dealing with the accumulated cryptographic technical debt embedded across legacy environments.

That debt takes many forms. Hard-coded keys that can’t be rotated. Outdated libraries locked into older algorithms. Systems built before algorithm agility was even considered. Vendor dependencies with unclear or nonexistent upgrade paths. These are the assets that resist change, quietly extend timelines, and introduce risk that’s difficult to mitigate.

Organizations that delay crypto inventory and cleanup often discover—too late—that their biggest obstacles to PQC aren’t quantum-specific at all. They’re the result of years of deferred decisions and inherited complexity. Post-quantum cryptography doesn’t create this problem; it exposes it.

PQC migration requires ownership, not just intent

Another important signal in recent government guidance isn’t technical—it’s organizational. By calling for explicit ownership of PQC migration, it acknowledges that post-quantum readiness cuts across silos.

Effective PQC programs require clear accountability for cryptographic risk, coordination between security, IT, and engineering teams, and ongoing tracking of readiness rather than one-time assessments. This isn’t a project with a neat endpoint. It’s an operational capability that must evolve as systems, threats, and standards change.

Organizations that treat PQC as a checkbox exercise will struggle to keep pace. Those that approach it as a sustained trust discipline will be far better positioned—not just for quantum-era threats, but for whatever comes next.

Preparing for PQC prepares you for everything else

There’s an irony at the heart of post-quantum readiness. The work required to prepare for it delivers immediate benefits, even before quantum threats materialize.

Building a reliable crypto inventory reduces blind spots that already exist today. CBOMs improve transparency and accountability across systems that were previously opaque. Addressing cryptographic technical debt lowers operational risk and makes future changes less disruptive. Crypto-agility, once established, simplifies every transition that follows.

In that sense, PQC isn’t just a future problem forcing action. It’s a forcing function that reveals long-standing weaknesses in how organizations manage digital trust.

Turn readiness into reality with DigiCert

For organizations beginning this journey, the first step isn’t selecting algorithms or setting migration deadlines. It’s gaining visibility into cryptographic assets, dependencies, and ownership—and using that insight to reduce risk methodically.

At DigiCert, we help organizations discover cryptographic assets, reduce hidden exposure, and modernize trust infrastructure in ways that support long-term agility. If post-quantum readiness is on your horizon, the most valuable move you can make today is understanding the cryptography you already rely on—while timelines are still yours to shape. 

Get in touch to learn how DigiCert ONE can help you inventory cryptography, reduce hidden technical debt, and build the crypto-agility needed to transition to post-quantum cryptography on your own terms.