Although quantum key distribution (QKD) promises information-theoretic security that can never be hacked, several studies have investigated how its security can be compromised by targeting the detectors in the system. Have they found truly fundamental problems with the physics of the scheme, or merely sloppy implementation? This study seeks to define best-practice criteria for these detectors, to distinguish between genuine loopholes and incorrect operation. The authors show that if these directions are followed, many of the attacks previously demonstrated simply do not work---bringing this technology a big step closer to everyday life.
Although quantum key distribution (QKD) promises information-theoretic security that can never be hacked, several studies have investigated how its security can be compromised by targeting the detectors in the system. Have they found truly fundamental problems with the physics of the scheme, or merely sloppy implementation? This study seeks to define best-practice criteria for these detectors, to distinguish between genuine loopholes and incorrect operation. The authors show that if these directions are followed, many of the attacks previously demonstrated simply do not work---bringing this technology a big step closer to everyday life.
Quantum key distribution (QKD) allows two users to communicate with information theoretic security by encoding information on single photons. This security is based on the laws of physics and as such can never be broken in theory. However, in practice, components do not always behave according to their theoretical models and these deviations can be exploited by an eavesdropper. In recent years, exposing loopholes in QKD systems, known as quantum hacking, has attracted significant attention. The components most susceptible to being hacked are the single-photon detectors, often avalanche photodiodes (APDs), as they are directly exposed to the optical channel. Whilst measurement-device-independent QKD removes detector vulnerability from the system, secure key rates with this technique can be much lower than point-to-point links. As such, mitigating attacks on QKD systems is a pressing challenge in QKD. In this thesis, the focus is on a special class of detectors, self-differencing APDs (SD-APDs), which have facilitated state-of-the art demonstrations of QKD. The susceptibility of SD-APDs to blinding attacks, the most explored and successful attack to date, was investigated and it was shown that by following best practice for their operation, such an attack would be unsuccessful. We have also proposed and developed a countermeasure such that the onus for appropriate operation could be removed from the user. We have also explored an arguably more dangerous attack, in the form of the after-gate attack. We have shown that delayed detection events, ordinarily considered detrimental in QKD, can provide inherent protection against this attack. Finally, backflashes in GHz-gated APDs were investigated for the first time and it was shown that threat they pose to QKD security is negligible. These results highlight the inherent protection to a number of attacks that self-differencing APDs possess. We stress that the findings presented in this thesis are also applicable to other types of fast-gated InGaAs APDs that don't possess self-differencing circuitry.
In recent years, the security of avalanche photodiodes as single photon detectors for quantum key distribution has been subjected to much scrutiny. The most prominent example of this surrounds the vulnerability of such devices to blinding under strong illumination. We focus on self-differencing avalanche photodiodes, single photon detectors that have demonstrated count rates exceeding 1 GCounts/s resulting in secure key rates over 1 MBit/s. These detectors use a passive electronic circuit to cancel any periodic signals thereby enhancing detection sensitivity. However this intrinsic feature can be exploited by adversaries to gain control of the devices using illumination of a moderate intensity. Through careful experimental examinations, we define here a set of criteria for these detectors to avoid such attacks.
Implementation of high-speed quantum key distribution (QKD) has become one of the major focuses in the field, which produces a high key-generation rate for applications. To achieve high-speed QKD, tailored techniques are developed and employed to quickly generate and detect quantum states. However, these techniques may introduce unique loopholes to compromise the security of QKD systems. In this paper, we investigate the loopholes of the self-differencing (SD) avalanche photodiode (APD) detector, typically used for high-speed detection in a QKD system, and demonstrate experimental testing of the SD APD detector under strong-pulse-illumination attack. This attack presents blinding stability and helps an eavesdropper to learn the secret key without introducing extra quantum bit rate error. Based on this testing, we propose a set of criteria for protecting SD APD detectors from the strong-pulse-illumination attack.
As necessary steps toward practical and secure quantum key distribution (QKD), identifying and patching possible attacks are important and valuable. This study discusses an avalanche-transition-region (ATR) attack on a gated-mode avalanche photodiode (APD) detector, widely used in QKD systems. Unlike other attacks, this one leaves almost no trace; the eavesdropper introduces less than 0.5% quantum bit-error rate, and the photocurrent and afterpulse probability before and after hacking are nearly identical. These findings highlight the importance of detection signals in real-life QKD systems, and are crucial to enhancing the security of practical QKD.
Technological advances in quantum computers and number theory have the potential to compromise the security of existing cryptographic protocols. Quantum key distribution (QKD) offers the possibility of information theoretic security and is theoretically unbreakable. Therefore it is the natural candidate to face the above digital threat. However, in implementing QKD, it is important to check that the components employed do not deviate from their expected behaviour, to avoid opening the door to new security loopholes [1]. For this reason, it is necessary to characterise the real behaviour of the components, build reliable models and include them in the security analysis. Here we introduce a set of techniques and measurements to ease this characterisation process. We discuss explicit examples applied to the source [2], the boundaries [3] and the detection unit [4] of a QKD apparatus. These methods pave the way to the future certification of QKD systems. [1] K. Tamaki, M. Curty, and M. Lucamarini, “Decoy-state quantum key distribution with a leaky source,” New J. Phys 18, 65008 (2016). [2] J. F. Dynes et al., “Testing the photon-number statistics of a quantum key distribution light source,” arXiv:1711.00440 (2017). [3] M. Lucamarini et al., “Practical Security Bounds Against the Trojan-Horse Attack in Quantum Key Distribution,” Phys. Rev. X 5, 031030 (2015). [4] A. Koehler-Sidki et al., “Setting best practice criteria for self-differencing avalanche photodiodes in quantum key distribution,” SPIE Proc. 10442, Quant. Inf. Sci. Tech. III, 104420L (2017).
With the emergence of an information society, the idea of protecting sensitive data is steadily gaining importance. Conventional encryption methods may not be sufficient to guarantee data protection in the future. Quantum key distribution (QKD) is an emerging technology that exploits fundamental physical properties to guarantee perfect security in theory. However, it is not easy to ensure in practice that the implementations of QKD systems are exactly in line with the theoretical specifications. Such theory-practice deviations can open loopholes and compromise security. Several such loopholes have been discovered and investigated in the last decade. These activities have motivated the proposal and implementation of appropriate countermeasures, thereby preventing future attacks and enhancing the practical security of QKD. This article introduces the so-called field of quantum hacking by summarising a variety of attacks and their prevention mechanisms.