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:1209.4696

Reusing devices with memory in device independent quantum key distribution

Matthew McKague, Lana Sheridan

Published Sep 21, 2012• 2 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Recently, it has been suggested [3] that device independent approaches to quantum key distribution may be of limited utility, since standard protocols could leak key to the adversary when devices are used repeatedly. We propose a means by which devices with memories could be reused from one run of a quantum key distribution protocol to the next while bounding the leakage to Eve, under the assumption that one run of the protocol could be completed securely using devices with memories.

Related papers

Memory Attacks on Device-Independent Quantum Cryptography

Jonathan Barrett, Roger Colbeck, Adrian Kent

Device-independent quantum cryptographic schemes aim to guarantee security to users based only on the output statistics of any components used, and without the need to verify their internal functionality. Since this would protect users against untrustworthy or incompetent manufacturers, sabotage, or device degradation, this idea has excited much interest, and many device-independent schemes have been proposed. Here we identify a critical weakness of device-independent protocols that rely on public communication between secure laboratories. Untrusted devices may record their inputs and outputs and reveal information about them via publicly discussed outputs during later runs. Reusing devices thus compromises the security of a protocol and risks leaking secret data. Possible defenses include securely destroying or isolating used devices. However, these are costly and often impractical. We propose other more practical partial defenses as well as a new protocol structure for device-independent quantum key distribution that aims to achieve composable security in the case of two parties using a small number of devices to repeatedly share keys with each other (and no other party).

arXiv:1201.4407•Physical Review Letters•Jan 2, 2013•174 citations

Prepare-and-measure quantum key distribution from a bound on information leakage

Abhishek Mishra, Michele Masini, Maria Balanzó-Juandó +2 more

Every quantum key distribution (QKD) protocol must limit the information available outside the users' laboratories. In device-independent QKD this is essentially the only assumption made on the devices. In a prepare-and-measure setting it cannot be imposed strictly, since the sender's device must emit a signal that depends on her private input. The natural replacement, and a minimal one, is a leakage bound: a bound on how much information about the input leaves the sender's laboratory, through the intended signal or through any side channel. We ask how far this unavoidable requirement can replace a detailed model of the source. We show that this single bound, quantified by the probability of guessing the input from everything the source emits, suffices to prove security against collective attacks. In our analysis, nothing is assumed about the precise form of the emitted states, their dimension, energy or purity, nor about the receiver's measurement device, beyond the standard requirement that it does not leak Bob's data. The standard B92 and BB84 protocols do not certify any key under this minimal leakage bound assumption. But closely related protocols can and, in the ideal limit, achieve one secret bit per key round. For noisy implementations, we compute key rates using semidefinite programming relaxations. Our best protocols tolerate visibilities down to 0.84, corresponding to an 8% quantum bit error rate, compared with the 11% threshold of standard device-dependent BB84.

quant-pharXiv:2610.37296•Oct 28, 2026•0 citations

Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution

Antonio Acín

Device-independent quantum key distribution protocols allow distributing a secret key whose security does not rely on any assumption on the inner working of the devices in the implementation. We discuss recent progress on the problem.

•Jan 1, 2015•5 citations

Fully Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution

Umesh V. Vazirani, Thomas Vidick

Quantum cryptography promises levels of security that are impossible to replicate in a classical world. Can this security be guaranteed even when the quantum devices on which the protocol relies are untrusted? This central question dates back to the early 1990s when the challenge of achieving device-independent quantum key distribution was first formulated. We answer this challenge by rigorously proving the device-independent security of a slight variant of Ekert's original entanglement-based protocol against the most general (coherent) attacks. The resulting protocol is robust: While assuming only that the devices can be modeled by the laws of quantum mechanics and are spatially isolated from each other and from any adversary's laboratory, it achieves a linear key rate and tolerates a constant noise rate in the devices. In particular, the devices may have quantum memory and share arbitrary quantum correlations with the eavesdropper. The proof of security is based on a new quantitative understanding of the monogamous nature of quantum correlations in the context of a multiparty protocol.

arXiv:1210.1810•Physical Review Letters•Sep 29, 2014•494 citations

Security of device-independent quantum key distribution under sequential attack

Pritam Roy, Souradeep Sasmal, Subhankar Bera +3 more

arXiv:2411.16822•Quantum Information Processing•Jun 20, 2026•1 citation

Insecurity of Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution

Konstantin Zaitsev, Polina Acheva

The security of practical quantum key distribution (QKD) systems is fundamentally constrained by vulnerabilities of single-photon detectors. Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution (MDI-QKD) was proposed to remove this limitation by allowing all measurements to be performed by a completely untrusted party, under the assumption that the measurement node can be treated as adversarial but does not compromise the security guarantees of the protocol. Here we show that this assumption is insufficient under realistic adversarial control of the measurement device. We present an attack in which an adversary exploits active control of the measurement node (Charlie) to obtain significant information about the secret key. The attack enables recovery of up to 70\% of the sifted key while introducing only 5.6\% quantum bit error rate. Unlike previously reported attacks targeting specific implementations of MDI-QKD, our results demonstrate a limitation of the standard security model underlying the protocol. These findings indicate that additional constraints on the measurement-device independence assumption, or refined security analyses incorporating stronger adversarial capabilities, are required to ensure the security of MDI-QKD in realistic scenarios.

quant-pharXiv:2607.01989•Jul 3, 2026•0 citations
Recently, it has been suggested [3] that device independent approaches to quantum key distribution may be of limited utility, since standard protocols could leak key to the adversary when devices are used repeatedly. We propose a means by which devices with memories could be reused from one run of a quantum key distribution protocol to the next while bounding the leakage to Eve, under the assumption that one run of the protocol could be completed securely using devices with memories.
Device-independent quantum cryptographic schemes aim to guarantee security to users based only on the output statistics of any components used, and without the need to verify their internal functionality. Since this would protect users against untrustworthy or incompetent manufacturers, sabotage, or device degradation, this idea has excited much interest, and many device-independent schemes have been proposed. Here we identify a critical weakness of device-independent protocols that rely on public communication between secure laboratories. Untrusted devices may record their inputs and outputs and reveal information about them via publicly discussed outputs during later runs. Reusing devices thus compromises the security of a protocol and risks leaking secret data. Possible defenses include securely destroying or isolating used devices. However, these are costly and often impractical. We propose other more practical partial defenses as well as a new protocol structure for device-independent quantum key distribution that aims to achieve composable security in the case of two parties using a small number of devices to repeatedly share keys with each other (and no other party).
Every quantum key distribution (QKD) protocol must limit the information available outside the users' laboratories. In device-independent QKD this is essentially the only assumption made on the devices. In a prepare-and-measure setting it cannot be imposed strictly, since the sender's device must emit a signal that depends on her private input. The natural replacement, and a minimal one, is a leakage bound: a bound on how much information about the input leaves the sender's laboratory, through the intended signal or through any side channel. We ask how far this unavoidable requirement can replace a detailed model of the source. We show that this single bound, quantified by the probability of guessing the input from everything the source emits, suffices to prove security against collective attacks. In our analysis, nothing is assumed about the precise form of the emitted states, their dimension, energy or purity, nor about the receiver's measurement device, beyond the standard requirement that it does not leak Bob's data. The standard B92 and BB84 protocols do not certify any key under this minimal leakage bound assumption. But closely related protocols can and, in the ideal limit, achieve one secret bit per key round. For noisy implementations, we compute key rates using semidefinite programming relaxations. Our best protocols tolerate visibilities down to 0.84, corresponding to an 8% quantum bit error rate, compared with the 11% threshold of standard device-dependent BB84.
Quantum cryptography promises levels of security that are impossible to replicate in a classical world. Can this security be guaranteed even when the quantum devices on which the protocol relies are untrusted? This central question dates back to the early 1990s when the challenge of achieving device-independent quantum key distribution was first formulated. We answer this challenge by rigorously proving the device-independent security of a slight variant of Ekert's original entanglement-based protocol against the most general (coherent) attacks. The resulting protocol is robust: While assuming only that the devices can be modeled by the laws of quantum mechanics and are spatially isolated from each other and from any adversary's laboratory, it achieves a linear key rate and tolerates a constant noise rate in the devices. In particular, the devices may have quantum memory and share arbitrary quantum correlations with the eavesdropper. The proof of security is based on a new quantitative understanding of the monogamous nature of quantum correlations in the context of a multiparty protocol.
The security of practical quantum key distribution (QKD) systems is fundamentally constrained by vulnerabilities of single-photon detectors. Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution (MDI-QKD) was proposed to remove this limitation by allowing all measurements to be performed by a completely untrusted party, under the assumption that the measurement node can be treated as adversarial but does not compromise the security guarantees of the protocol. Here we show that this assumption is insufficient under realistic adversarial control of the measurement device. We present an attack in which an adversary exploits active control of the measurement node (Charlie) to obtain significant information about the secret key. The attack enables recovery of up to 70\% of the sifted key while introducing only 5.6\% quantum bit error rate. Unlike previously reported attacks targeting specific implementations of MDI-QKD, our results demonstrate a limitation of the standard security model underlying the protocol. These findings indicate that additional constraints on the measurement-device independence assumption, or refined security analyses incorporating stronger adversarial capabilities, are required to ensure the security of MDI-QKD in realistic scenarios.