The crypto-agility competition discussed at GDC26 and through the IKP working group now has a category here, a working repository, and a hub on the BGIN website.
Repository: GitHub - bgin-global/pqc-agility-competition: BGIN coordination repository for the METI/NEDO PQC Migration Prize: evaluation committee, outcomes, metrics, crypto-agility testbed · GitHub
Hub: BGIN
The Japanese Government (METI/NEDO) hosts the competition, publishes the call, sets the rules and awards the prize. BGIN coordinates internationally and runs the neutral evaluation testbed. Between now and the call, the work is public: form the evaluation committee, ratify the outcomes, draft the metrics and rubric, and specify the testbed. Six workshops from late September 2026 to February 2027 carry that work; applications open January 2027 as planned.
The repository holds all of it in draft: GOVERNANCE.md, OUTCOMES.md (O1–O6), evaluation/METRICS.md (22 candidate metrics), evaluation/RUBRIC.md, testbed/SCHEMES.md and testbed/HARNESS.md, and workshops/ROADMAP.md. Every document is marked draft v0. None of it is settled; that is the point of publishing it now rather than after.
Three ways to take part
- Nominate someone for the evaluation committee — including yourself. Composition is a draft table ratified at W1. Separate topic to follow.
- Propose or challenge a metric, or argue a scheme scope ruling. The metric register carries 22 candidates and six open questions; the scheme table carries six integration paths (
C-01–C-06) that are explicitly rulings, not defaults. Separate topic to follow. - Offer a testbed node. Geographic distribution is what makes the evidence neutral, and the node call is a W3 output. Separate topic to follow.
Each of the three has a GitHub issue template. A post here is fine too; the repository is where it ends up either way.
One more, asked plainly: the repository’s rule is that nothing merges without a review from a convener who is not the author, and there is no administrator bypass. With one convener seated, the record cannot move. A second convener with a signing key is the first seat to fill, and it is asked for here before anything else is.
Two things stated plainly
Dates disagree, and both are carried. The July community briefing targets winner selection for mid-September 2028; the GDC26 meeting report says March 2029. Both are provisional and the host’s call text settles it. The repository carries both, attributed, rather than picking one.
Not everything can be public, and the rule for that is public. Some source material was circulated to working-group members without a publication clearance, nominations and conflict-of-interest disclosures name people, and draft call text is the host’s to announce. That material is held in a separate, access-controlled repository. What makes something eligible to be held — and the gate it passes through to be released — is published in the open repository, along with a register of what has been released and what has been refused. Unfinished work and disagreement are not reasons to hold anything; they stay in public.
Sources
- GDC26 meeting report — Post-Quantum Cryptography Migration on DLTs (3 Sep 2026), and its thread here.
- METI/NEDO community briefing (July 2026) — in the repository at
resources/, with a plain-text digest. - IKP Post Quantum Cryptography thread 06/26.
- The resource estimates and attack classes the GDC26 room used — Securing Elliptic Curve Cryptocurrencies against Quantum Vulnerabilities: Resource Estimates and Mitigations, PRX Quantum 7, 031001 (21 Aug 2026), open access: https://doi.org/10.1103/j3xf-bw18.