QNSI

Composite scenarios grounded in real problems

Modelled case studies for post-quantum decisions.

Each case models a recognisable sector problem, the event that forces a decision, how QNSI would help, the artifact the team should produce, and what must be independently validated. These are composite scenarios, not customer deployments or claimed outcomes.

106Modelled cases
28Sector contexts
1Decision per page

Browse the library

Choose the environment you are responsible for

Each sector contains four distinct situations built around its systems, owners, failure modes, and evidence requirements.

Source-grounded composite scenarios

Find the situation that resembles yours

The cited primary sources establish the real external problem or obligation. The organisation and QNSI engagement are modelled so no customer or outcome is invented.

01 · AI & agent platforms

1 scenarios

02 · AI & data platforms

4 scenarios

03 · Automotive & mobility

4 scenarios

04 · Aviation

4 scenarios

05 · Banking & payments

5 scenarios

06 · Cloud & data centres

4 scenarios

07 · Defense & national security

4 scenarios

08 · Digital assets & fintech

4 scenarios

09 · Education & research

4 scenarios

10 · Energy & electric grid

4 scenarios

11 · Energy & utilities

1 scenarios

12 · Government

4 scenarios

13 · Healthcare providers

4 scenarios

14 · Insurance & asset management

4 scenarios

15 · IoT & smart cities

4 scenarios

17 · Manufacturing

4 scenarios

18 · Maritime & ports

4 scenarios

19 · Media & digital content

4 scenarios

20 · Medical devices

4 scenarios

21 · Oil, gas & pipelines

4 scenarios

22 · Pharma & life sciences

4 scenarios

23 · Public sector

1 scenarios

24 · Rail & public transit

4 scenarios

25 · Retail & ecommerce

4 scenarios

26 · Software & SaaS

6 scenarios

Product Security · Engineering · EU Compliance

Create the cryptography evidence index for a CRA product technical file

Can every material cryptographic design claim be traced to implementation, test evidence, lifecycle support, and residual risk?

Read the modelled case study →

PSIRT · Legal · Product Operations

Connect a product cryptography incident to the CRA reporting clock

Does an exploited vulnerability or severe incident meet reporting criteria, and what is known at each deadline?

Read the modelled case study →

Release Engineering · Product Security · Customer Trust

Give SaaS customers verifiable release-signing provenance

Can a customer verify which build produced an artifact and which authorized identity approved it?

Read the modelled case study →

Application Security · Platform Engineering · Architecture

Find hidden cryptography in a SaaS dependency graph

Which libraries, runtimes, services, and managed dependencies will block a cryptographic transition?

Read the modelled case study →

Product Security Officer · Head of Engineering · Legal

Stand up CRA Article 14 reporting with signed incident evidence

How do we meet the CRA's actively-exploited-vulnerability and severe-incident reporting duties without leaking customer data in the process?

Read the modelled case study →

CTO · Data Protection Officer · Platform Lead

Offer in-region cryptographic custody for sovereign deals

Can we offer customers in-region cryptographic custody without rebuilding the product?

Read the modelled case study →

27 · Telecommunications

4 scenarios

28 · Water & wastewater

4 scenarios

Customer evidence status

A modelled case study is not deployment evidence.

QNSI has not published a verified customer deployment case study. Every modelled case separates QNSI's potential contribution from customer testing, legal applicability, accreditation, integration, production evidence, and independent assurance still required.