Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0803.4226 · Physical Review A

Security proof for quantum-key-distribution systems with threshold detectors

Toyohiro Tsurumaru, Kiyoshi Tamaki

Published Sep 2, 2008• 103 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In this paper, we rigorously prove the intuition that in security proofs for the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol, one may regard an incoming signal to Bob as a qubit state. From this result, it follows that all security proofs for BB84 protocol based on a virtual qubit entanglement distillation protocol, which was originally proposed by Lo and Chau [Science 283, 2050 (1999)] and by Shor and Preskill [Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 441 (2000)], are all valid even if Bob's actual apparatus cannot distill a qubit state explicitly. As a consequence, especially, the well-known result that a higher bit error rate of 20% can be tolerated for BB84 protocol by using two-way classical communications is still valid even when Bob uses threshold detectors. Using the same technique, we also prove the security of Bennett-Brassard-Mermin 1992 (BBM92) protocol where Alice and Bob both use threshold detectors.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.78.032302

Related papers

Proof of security of quantum key distribution with two-way classical communications

Daniel Gottesman, Hoi‐Kwong Lo

Shor and Preskill (see Phys. Rev. Lett., vol.85, p.441, 2000) have provided a simple proof of security of the standard quantum key distribution scheme by Bennett and Brassard (1984) by demonstrating a connection between key distribution and entanglement purification protocols (EPPs) with one-way communications. Here, we provide proofs of security of standard quantum key distribution schemes, Bennett and Brassard and the six-state scheme, against the most general attack, by using the techniques of two-way entanglement purification. We demonstrate clearly the advantage of classical post-processing with two-way classical communications over classical post-processing with only one-way classical communications in quantum key distribution (QKD). This is done by the explicit construction of a new protocol for (the error correction/detection and privacy amplification of) Bennett and Brassard that can tolerate a bit error rate of up to 18.9%, which is higher than what any Bennett and Brassard scheme with only one-way classical communications can possibly tolerate. Moreover, we demonstrate the advantage of the six-state scheme over Bennett and Brassard by showing that the six-state scheme can strictly tolerate a higher bit error rate than Bennett and Brassard. In particular, our six-state protocol can tolerate a bit error rate of 26.4%, which is higher than the upper bound of 25% bit error rate for any secure Bennett and Brassard protocol. Consequently, our protocols may allow higher key generation rate and remain secure over longer distances than previous protocols. Our investigation suggests that two-way entanglement purification is a useful tool in the study of advantage distillation, error correction, and privacy amplification protocols.

arXiv:quant-ph/0105121•IEEE Transactions on Information Theory•Feb 1, 2003•374 citations

Security of the BB84 protocol with passive biased basis choice by the receiver

Shun Kawakami, Atsushi Taniguchi, Yoshihide Tonomura +2 more

The Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol is one of the simplest protocols for implementing quantum key distribution (QKD). In the protocol, the sender and the receiver iteratively choose one of two complementary measurement bases. Regarding the basis choice by the receiver, a passive setup has been adopted in a number of its implementations, including satellite QKD and time-bin encoding. However, conventional theoretical techniques to prove the security of the BB84 protocol are not applicable if the receiver chooses their measurement basis passively, rather than actively, with a biased probability, followed by measurement with threshold detectors. Here we present a fully analytical security proof against coherent attacks for such a decoy-state BB84 protocol with the receiver’s passive basis choice and measurement with threshold detectors. Numerical simulations under practical situations show that the difference in secure key rate between the active and passive implementations of the protocol is negligible except for long communication distances.

arXiv:2507.04248•Physical Review Applied•Nov 24, 2025•1 citation

Simple Proof of Security of the BB84 Quantum Key Distribution Protocol

Peter W. Shor, John P. Preskill

We prove that the 1984 protocol of Bennett and Brassard (BB84) for quantum key distribution is secure. We first give a key distribution protocol based on entanglement purification, which can be proven secure using methods from Lo and Chau's proof of security for a similar protocol. We then show that the security of this protocol implies the security of BB84. The entanglement purification based protocol uses Calderbank-Shor-Steane codes, and properties of these codes are used to remove the use of quantum computation from the Lo-Chau protocol.

arXiv:quant-ph/0003004•Physical Review Letters•Jul 10, 2000•3,049 citations

Simple proof of the unconditional security of the Bennett 1992 quantum key distribution protocol

Quan Zhang, Tang Chaojing

It is generally accepted that quantum key distribution (QKD) could supply legitimate users with unconditional security during their communication. Quite a lot of satisfactory efforts have been achieved on experimentations with quantum cryptography. However, when the eavesdropper has extra-powerful computational ability, has access to a quantum computer, for example, and can carry into execution any eavesdropping measurement that is allowed by the laws of physics, the security against such attacks has not been widely studied and rigorously proved for most QKD protocols. Quite recently, Shor and Preskill proved concisely the unconditional security of the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol. Their method is highly valued for its clarity of concept and concision of form. In order to take advantage of the Shor-Preskill technique in their proof of the unconditional security of the BB84 QKD protocol, we introduced in this paper a transformation that can translate the Bennett 1992 (B92) protocol into the BB84 protocol. By proving that the transformation leaks no more information to the eavesdropper, we proved the unconditional security of the B92 protocol. We also settled the problem proposed by Lo about how to prove the unconditional security of the B92 protocol with the Shor-Preskill method.

Physical Review A•May 28, 2002•20 citations

Shor-Preskill-type security proof for concatenated Bennett-Brassard 1984 quantum-key-distribution protocol

Won-Young Hwang, Keiji Matsumoto, Hiroshi Imai +2 more

We discuss a long code problem in the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) quantum-key-distribution protocol and describe how it can be overcome by concatenation of the protocol. Observing that concatenated modified Lo-Chau protocol finally reduces to the concatenated BB84 protocol, we give the unconditional security of the concatenated BB84 protocol.

arXiv:quant-ph/0110079•Physical Review A•Feb 10, 2003•2 citations

Security of quantum key distribution with bit and basis dependent detector flaws

Lars Lydersen, Johannes Skaar

We consider the security of the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol for Quantum Key Distribution (QKD), in the presence of bit and basis dependent detector flaws. We suggest a powerful attack that can be used in systems with detector efficiency mismatch, even if the detector assignments are chosen randomly by Bob. A security proof is provided, valid for any basis dependent, possibly lossy, linear optical imperfections in the channel/receiver/detectors. The proof does not assume the so-called squashing detector model.

arXiv:0807.0767•Quantum Information and Computation•Jan 1, 2010•32 citations
In this paper, we rigorously prove the intuition that in security proofs for the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol, one may regard an incoming signal to Bob as a qubit state. From this result, it follows that all security proofs for BB84 protocol based on a virtual qubit entanglement distillation protocol, which was originally proposed by Lo and Chau [Science 283, 2050 (1999)] and by Shor and Preskill [Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 441 (2000)], are all valid even if Bob's actual apparatus cannot distill a qubit state explicitly. As a consequence, especially, the well-known result that a higher bit error rate of 20% can be tolerated for BB84 protocol by using two-way classical communications is still valid even when Bob uses threshold detectors. Using the same technique, we also prove the security of Bennett-Brassard-Mermin 1992 (BBM92) protocol where Alice and Bob both use threshold detectors.
Shor and Preskill (see Phys. Rev. Lett., vol.85, p.441, 2000) have provided a simple proof of security of the standard quantum key distribution scheme by Bennett and Brassard (1984) by demonstrating a connection between key distribution and entanglement purification protocols (EPPs) with one-way communications. Here, we provide proofs of security of standard quantum key distribution schemes, Bennett and Brassard and the six-state scheme, against the most general attack, by using the techniques of two-way entanglement purification. We demonstrate clearly the advantage of classical post-processing with two-way classical communications over classical post-processing with only one-way classical communications in quantum key distribution (QKD). This is done by the explicit construction of a new protocol for (the error correction/detection and privacy amplification of) Bennett and Brassard that can tolerate a bit error rate of up to 18.9%, which is higher than what any Bennett and Brassard scheme with only one-way classical communications can possibly tolerate. Moreover, we demonstrate the advantage of the six-state scheme over Bennett and Brassard by showing that the six-state scheme can strictly tolerate a higher bit error rate than Bennett and Brassard. In particular, our six-state protocol can tolerate a bit error rate of 26.4%, which is higher than the upper bound of 25% bit error rate for any secure Bennett and Brassard protocol. Consequently, our protocols may allow higher key generation rate and remain secure over longer distances than previous protocols. Our investigation suggests that two-way entanglement purification is a useful tool in the study of advantage distillation, error correction, and privacy amplification protocols.
The Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol is one of the simplest protocols for implementing quantum key distribution (QKD). In the protocol, the sender and the receiver iteratively choose one of two complementary measurement bases. Regarding the basis choice by the receiver, a passive setup has been adopted in a number of its implementations, including satellite QKD and time-bin encoding. However, conventional theoretical techniques to prove the security of the BB84 protocol are not applicable if the receiver chooses their measurement basis passively, rather than actively, with a biased probability, followed by measurement with threshold detectors. Here we present a fully analytical security proof against coherent attacks for such a decoy-state BB84 protocol with the receiver’s passive basis choice and measurement with threshold detectors. Numerical simulations under practical situations show that the difference in secure key rate between the active and passive implementations of the protocol is negligible except for long communication distances.
We prove that the 1984 protocol of Bennett and Brassard (BB84) for quantum key distribution is secure. We first give a key distribution protocol based on entanglement purification, which can be proven secure using methods from Lo and Chau's proof of security for a similar protocol. We then show that the security of this protocol implies the security of BB84. The entanglement purification based protocol uses Calderbank-Shor-Steane codes, and properties of these codes are used to remove the use of quantum computation from the Lo-Chau protocol.
It is generally accepted that quantum key distribution (QKD) could supply legitimate users with unconditional security during their communication. Quite a lot of satisfactory efforts have been achieved on experimentations with quantum cryptography. However, when the eavesdropper has extra-powerful computational ability, has access to a quantum computer, for example, and can carry into execution any eavesdropping measurement that is allowed by the laws of physics, the security against such attacks has not been widely studied and rigorously proved for most QKD protocols. Quite recently, Shor and Preskill proved concisely the unconditional security of the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol. Their method is highly valued for its clarity of concept and concision of form. In order to take advantage of the Shor-Preskill technique in their proof of the unconditional security of the BB84 QKD protocol, we introduced in this paper a transformation that can translate the Bennett 1992 (B92) protocol into the BB84 protocol. By proving that the transformation leaks no more information to the eavesdropper, we proved the unconditional security of the B92 protocol. We also settled the problem proposed by Lo about how to prove the unconditional security of the B92 protocol with the Shor-Preskill method.
We consider the security of the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol for Quantum Key Distribution (QKD), in the presence of bit and basis dependent detector flaws. We suggest a powerful attack that can be used in systems with detector efficiency mismatch, even if the detector assignments are chosen randomly by Bob. A security proof is provided, valid for any basis dependent, possibly lossy, linear optical imperfections in the channel/receiver/detectors. The proof does not assume the so-called squashing detector model.