An adversary copies your encrypted traffic today and waits for a quantum computer to decrypt it later. How exposed are you? We show that the functional form of the answer is not merely a calibration choice -- it is structurally justified by three assumptions about adversarial production and value-decay dynamics. Under those assumptions, the HNDL compromise probability factorises into a temporal hazard, a multiplicative cryptographic-vulnerability and operational-exposure term, and a saturation denominator governed by the defense-attack intensity ratio; the marginal sensitivity to each dimension is endogenous to the organisation's position in the vulnerability-exposure plane, not a fixed global constant. Additive scoring frameworks cannot reproduce this structure because the interaction between cryptographic vulnerability and operational exposure is absent by construction, regardless of calibration. The resulting framework provides a structurally grounded basis for operational HNDL exposure prioritisation under partial observability.

翻译：攻击者今天截获你的加密流量，等待量子计算机在未来将其解密。你的暴露程度如何？我们证明答案的函数形式并非仅仅是标定选择——它由关于敌手生产与价值衰减动力学的三个假设提供了结构性支撑。在这些假设下，HNDL泄露概率可分解为时间性风险、乘法性密码脆弱性与运行暴露项，以及由防御-攻击强度比主导的饱和分母；对每个维度的边际敏感性内生决定于组织在脆弱性-暴露平面中的位置，而非固定的全局常数。加性评分框架无法重现此结构，因为无论标定如何，密码脆弱性与运行暴露之间的交互作用在构造上即不存在。由此形成的框架为部分可观测条件下运行性HNDL暴露优先级排序提供了结构性基础。