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:1206.6668 · Physical Review A

Security proof of the unbalanced phase-encoded Bennett-Brassard 1984 protocol

Agnes Ferenczi, Varun Narasimhachar, Norbert Lütkenhaus

Published Oct 19, 2012• 15 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In optical implementations of the phase-encoded BB84 protocol, the bit information is usually encoded in the phase of two consecutive photon pulses generated in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. In the actual experimental realization, the loss in the arms of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer is not balanced, for example because only one arm contains a lossy phase modulator. Therefore, the amplitudes of the pulses are not balanced, and the structure of the signals and measurements no longer corresponds to the (balanced) ideal BB84 protocol. Hence, the BB84 security analysis no longer applies in this scenario. We provide a security proof of the unbalanced phase-encoded BB84. The resulting key rate turns out to be lower than the key rate of the ideal BB84 protocol. Therefore, in order to guarantee security, the loss due to the phase modulator cannot be ignored.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.86.042327

Related papers

Security of practical phase-coding quantum key distribution

Hong-Wei Li, Zheng-Qiang Yin, Zheng‐Fu Han +2 more

Security proof of practical quantum key distribution (QKD) has attracted a lot of attentions in recent years. Most of real-life QKD implementations are based on phase-coding BB84 protocol, which usually use Unbalanced Mach-Zehnder Interferometer (UMZI) as the information encoder and decoder. However, the long arm and short arm of UMZI will introduce different loss in practical experimental realizations, the state emitted by Alice's side is nolonger perfect BB84 states correspondingly. In this paper, we will give the security analysis in this situation. Counterintuitively, active compensation for this different loss will only lower the secret key bit rate.

arXiv:0911.2938•Quantum Information and Computation•Sep 1, 2010•6 citations

Improving key rates of the unbalanced phase-encoded BB84 protocol using the flag-state squashing model

Nicky Kai Hong Li, Norbert Lütkenhaus

All phase-encoded BB84 implementations have signal states with unbalanced amplitudes in practice.Thus the original security analyses a priori do not apply to them.Previous security proofs use signal tagging of multiphoton pulses to recover the behavior of regular BB84.This is overly conservative as for unbalanced signals the photon number splitting attack does not leak full information to Eve.In this work we exploit the flag-state squashing model to preserve some parts of the multiphoton-generated private information in our analysis.Using a numerical proof technique we obtain significantly higher key rates compared with previously published results in the low-loss regime.It turns out that the usual scenario of untrusted dark counts runs into conceptual difficulties in some parameter regimes.Thus we discuss the trusted dark-count scenario in this paper as well.We also report a gain in key rates when part of the total loss is known to be induced by a trusted device.We highlight that all these key rate improvements can be achieved without modification of the experimental setup.

arXiv:2007.08662•Physical Review Research•Nov 2, 2020•15 citations

Security of quantum key distribution using weak coherent states with nonrandom phases

Hoi‐Kwong Lo, John P. Preskill

We prove the security of the Bennett-Brassard (BB84) quantum key distribution protocol in the case where the key information is encoded in the relative phase of a coherent-state reference pulse and a weak coherent-state signal pulse, as in some practical implementations of the protocol. In contrast to previous work, our proof applies even if the eavesdropper knows the phase of the reference pulse, provided that this phase is not modulated by the source, and even if the reference pulse is bright. The proof also applies to the case where the key is encoded in the photon polarization of a weak coherent-state pulse with a known phase, but only if the phases of the four BB84 signal states are judiciously chosen. The achievable key generation rate scales quadratically with the transmission in the channel, just as for BB84 with phase-randomized weak coherent-state signals (when decoy states are not used). For the case where the phase of the reference pulse is strongly modulated by the source, we exhibit an explicit attack that allows the eavesdropper to learn every key bit in a parameter regime where a protocol using phase-randomized signals is provably secure.

arXiv:quant-ph/0610203•Quantum Information and Computation•Jul 1, 2007•122 citations

Security of the differential-quadrature-phase-shift quantum key distribution

Shun Kawakami, Toshihiko Sasaki, Masato Koashi

One of the simplest methods for implementing quantum key distribution over fiber-optic communication is the Bennett-Brassard 1984 protocol with phase encoding (PE-BB84 protocol), in which the sender uses phase modulation over double pulses from a laser and the receiver uses a passive delayed interferometer. Using essentially the same setup and by regarding a train of many pulses as a single block, one can carry out the so-called differential-quadrature-phase-shift (DQPS) protocol, which is a variant of differential-phase-shift (DPS) protocols. Here we prove the security of the DQPS protocol based on an adaptation of proof techniques for the BB84 protocol, which inherits the advantages arising from the simplicity of the protocol, such as accommodating the use of threshold detectors and simple off-line calibration methods for the light source. We show that the secure key rate of the DQPS protocol in the proof is eight-thirds as high as the rate of the PE-BB84 protocol.

arXiv:1512.08129•Physical Review A•Aug 24, 2016•16 citations

Security proof methods for quantum key distribution protocols

Agnes Ferenczi

In this thesis we develop practical tools for quantum key distribution (QKD) security proofs. We apply the tools to provide security proofs for several protocols, ranging from discrete variable protocols in high dimensions, protocols with realistic implementations, measurement device independent QKD and continuous-variable QKD. The security proofs are based on the Devetak-Winter security framework [I. Devetak and A. Winter, Proc. of the Roy. Soc. of London Series A, 461, 207 (2005); B. Kraus, N. Gisin, and R. Renner, Phys. Rev. Lett., 95 080501 (2005)]. \n \nIn the key rate calculation, it is often convenient to assume that the optimal attack is symmetric. \nUnder the assumption that the parameter estimation is based on coarse-grained observations, we show that the optimal attack is symmetric, if the protocol and the postselection have sufficient symmetries. \nAs an example we calculate the key rates of protocols using 2, d and d+1 mutually unbiased bases in d-dimensional Hilbert spaces. \n \nWe investigate the connection between the optimal collective eavesdropping attack and the optimal cloning attack, in which the eavesdropper employs an optimal cloner to attack the protocol. \nWe find that, in general, it does not hold that the optimal attack is an optimal cloner. However, there are classes of protocols, for which we can identify the optimal attack by an optimal cloner. \nWe analyze protocols with mutually unbiased bases in d dimensions, and show that for the protocols with 2 and d+1 mutually unbiased bases the optimal attack is an optimal cloner, but for the protocols with d mutually unbiased bases, it is not. \n \nIn optical implementations of the phase-encoded BB84 protocol, the bit information is usually encoded in the phase of two consecutive photon pulses generated in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. In the actual experimental realization, the loss in the arms of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer is not balanced, for example because only one arm contains a lossy phase modulator. \nSince the imbalance changes the structure of the signals states and measurements, the BB84 security analysis no longer applies in this scenario. \nWe provide a security proof for the unbalanced phase-encoded BB84. The loss does lower the key rate compared to a protocol without loss. However, for a realistic parameter regime, the same key rate is found by applying the original BB84 security analysis. \n \nRecently, the security of a measurement device-independent QKD setup with BB84 signal states was proven in Refs. [H.-K. Lo, M. Curty, and B. Qi, Phys. Rev. Lett., 108 (2012); S. L. Braunstein and S. Pirandola, Phys. Rev. Lett., 108 (2012)]. In this setup Alice and Bob send quantum states to an intermediate node, which performs the measurement, and is assumed to be controlled by Eve. \nWe analyze the security of a measurement device-independent QKD protocol with B92 signal states, and calculate the key rates numerically for a realistic implementation. \nBased on our security proof we were able to prove the security of the strong reference pulse B92 protocol. \n \nWe analyze the security of continuous-variable protocols using the entropic uncertainty relations established in Ref. [M. Berta, M. Christandl, R. Colbeck, J. M. Renes, and R. Renner, Nature Physics 6, 659 (2010)] to provide an estimate of the key rate based on the observed first and second moments. We analyze a protocol with squeezed coherent states and the 2-state protocol with two coherent states with opposite phases.

•Apr 26, 2013•11 citations

Blind post-processing for the unbalanced BB84

Satoshi Sunohara, Kiyoshi Tamaki, Nobuyuki Imoto

For the realization of quantum key distribution, it is important to investigate its security based on a mathematical model that captures properties of the actual devices used by the legitimate users. Recently, Ferenczi, et. al. (Phys. Rev. A 86 042327 (2012)) pointed out potential influences that the losses in phase modulators and/or the unbalance in the transmission rate of beam splitters may have on the security of the phase-encoded BB84 and analyzed the security of this scheme, which is called the unbalanced BB84. In this paper, we ask whether blindly applying the post-processing of the balanced BB84 to the unbalanced BB84 would lead to an insecure key or not, and we conclude that we can safely distill a secure key even with this post-processing. It follows from our proof that as long as the unbalances are basis-independent, our conclusion holds even if the unbalances are unknown and fluctuate in time.

arXiv:1302.1701•Feb 7, 2013•1 citation
In optical implementations of the phase-encoded BB84 protocol, the bit information is usually encoded in the phase of two consecutive photon pulses generated in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. In the actual experimental realization, the loss in the arms of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer is not balanced, for example because only one arm contains a lossy phase modulator. Therefore, the amplitudes of the pulses are not balanced, and the structure of the signals and measurements no longer corresponds to the (balanced) ideal BB84 protocol. Hence, the BB84 security analysis no longer applies in this scenario. We provide a security proof of the unbalanced phase-encoded BB84. The resulting key rate turns out to be lower than the key rate of the ideal BB84 protocol. Therefore, in order to guarantee security, the loss due to the phase modulator cannot be ignored.
Security proof of practical quantum key distribution (QKD) has attracted a lot of attentions in recent years. Most of real-life QKD implementations are based on phase-coding BB84 protocol, which usually use Unbalanced Mach-Zehnder Interferometer (UMZI) as the information encoder and decoder. However, the long arm and short arm of UMZI will introduce different loss in practical experimental realizations, the state emitted by Alice's side is nolonger perfect BB84 states correspondingly. In this paper, we will give the security analysis in this situation. Counterintuitively, active compensation for this different loss will only lower the secret key bit rate.
All phase-encoded BB84 implementations have signal states with unbalanced amplitudes in practice.Thus the original security analyses a priori do not apply to them.Previous security proofs use signal tagging of multiphoton pulses to recover the behavior of regular BB84.This is overly conservative as for unbalanced signals the photon number splitting attack does not leak full information to Eve.In this work we exploit the flag-state squashing model to preserve some parts of the multiphoton-generated private information in our analysis.Using a numerical proof technique we obtain significantly higher key rates compared with previously published results in the low-loss regime.It turns out that the usual scenario of untrusted dark counts runs into conceptual difficulties in some parameter regimes.Thus we discuss the trusted dark-count scenario in this paper as well.We also report a gain in key rates when part of the total loss is known to be induced by a trusted device.We highlight that all these key rate improvements can be achieved without modification of the experimental setup.
We prove the security of the Bennett-Brassard (BB84) quantum key distribution protocol in the case where the key information is encoded in the relative phase of a coherent-state reference pulse and a weak coherent-state signal pulse, as in some practical implementations of the protocol. In contrast to previous work, our proof applies even if the eavesdropper knows the phase of the reference pulse, provided that this phase is not modulated by the source, and even if the reference pulse is bright. The proof also applies to the case where the key is encoded in the photon polarization of a weak coherent-state pulse with a known phase, but only if the phases of the four BB84 signal states are judiciously chosen. The achievable key generation rate scales quadratically with the transmission in the channel, just as for BB84 with phase-randomized weak coherent-state signals (when decoy states are not used). For the case where the phase of the reference pulse is strongly modulated by the source, we exhibit an explicit attack that allows the eavesdropper to learn every key bit in a parameter regime where a protocol using phase-randomized signals is provably secure.
One of the simplest methods for implementing quantum key distribution over fiber-optic communication is the Bennett-Brassard 1984 protocol with phase encoding (PE-BB84 protocol), in which the sender uses phase modulation over double pulses from a laser and the receiver uses a passive delayed interferometer. Using essentially the same setup and by regarding a train of many pulses as a single block, one can carry out the so-called differential-quadrature-phase-shift (DQPS) protocol, which is a variant of differential-phase-shift (DPS) protocols. Here we prove the security of the DQPS protocol based on an adaptation of proof techniques for the BB84 protocol, which inherits the advantages arising from the simplicity of the protocol, such as accommodating the use of threshold detectors and simple off-line calibration methods for the light source. We show that the secure key rate of the DQPS protocol in the proof is eight-thirds as high as the rate of the PE-BB84 protocol.
In this thesis we develop practical tools for quantum key distribution (QKD) security proofs. We apply the tools to provide security proofs for several protocols, ranging from discrete variable protocols in high dimensions, protocols with realistic implementations, measurement device independent QKD and continuous-variable QKD. The security proofs are based on the Devetak-Winter security framework [I. Devetak and A. Winter, Proc. of the Roy. Soc. of London Series A, 461, 207 (2005); B. Kraus, N. Gisin, and R. Renner, Phys. Rev. Lett., 95 080501 (2005)]. \n \nIn the key rate calculation, it is often convenient to assume that the optimal attack is symmetric. \nUnder the assumption that the parameter estimation is based on coarse-grained observations, we show that the optimal attack is symmetric, if the protocol and the postselection have sufficient symmetries. \nAs an example we calculate the key rates of protocols using 2, d and d+1 mutually unbiased bases in d-dimensional Hilbert spaces. \n \nWe investigate the connection between the optimal collective eavesdropping attack and the optimal cloning attack, in which the eavesdropper employs an optimal cloner to attack the protocol. \nWe find that, in general, it does not hold that the optimal attack is an optimal cloner. However, there are classes of protocols, for which we can identify the optimal attack by an optimal cloner. \nWe analyze protocols with mutually unbiased bases in d dimensions, and show that for the protocols with 2 and d+1 mutually unbiased bases the optimal attack is an optimal cloner, but for the protocols with d mutually unbiased bases, it is not. \n \nIn optical implementations of the phase-encoded BB84 protocol, the bit information is usually encoded in the phase of two consecutive photon pulses generated in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. In the actual experimental realization, the loss in the arms of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer is not balanced, for example because only one arm contains a lossy phase modulator. \nSince the imbalance changes the structure of the signals states and measurements, the BB84 security analysis no longer applies in this scenario. \nWe provide a security proof for the unbalanced phase-encoded BB84. The loss does lower the key rate compared to a protocol without loss. However, for a realistic parameter regime, the same key rate is found by applying the original BB84 security analysis. \n \nRecently, the security of a measurement device-independent QKD setup with BB84 signal states was proven in Refs. [H.-K. Lo, M. Curty, and B. Qi, Phys. Rev. Lett., 108 (2012); S. L. Braunstein and S. Pirandola, Phys. Rev. Lett., 108 (2012)]. In this setup Alice and Bob send quantum states to an intermediate node, which performs the measurement, and is assumed to be controlled by Eve. \nWe analyze the security of a measurement device-independent QKD protocol with B92 signal states, and calculate the key rates numerically for a realistic implementation. \nBased on our security proof we were able to prove the security of the strong reference pulse B92 protocol. \n \nWe analyze the security of continuous-variable protocols using the entropic uncertainty relations established in Ref. [M. Berta, M. Christandl, R. Colbeck, J. M. Renes, and R. Renner, Nature Physics 6, 659 (2010)] to provide an estimate of the key rate based on the observed first and second moments. We analyze a protocol with squeezed coherent states and the 2-state protocol with two coherent states with opposite phases.
For the realization of quantum key distribution, it is important to investigate its security based on a mathematical model that captures properties of the actual devices used by the legitimate users. Recently, Ferenczi, et. al. (Phys. Rev. A 86 042327 (2012)) pointed out potential influences that the losses in phase modulators and/or the unbalance in the transmission rate of beam splitters may have on the security of the phase-encoded BB84 and analyzed the security of this scheme, which is called the unbalanced BB84. In this paper, we ask whether blindly applying the post-processing of the balanced BB84 to the unbalanced BB84 would lead to an insecure key or not, and we conclude that we can safely distill a secure key even with this post-processing. It follows from our proof that as long as the unbalances are basis-independent, our conclusion holds even if the unbalances are unknown and fluctuate in time.