Classically testing for the presence of anti-commuting operators on a quantum device is a critical tool underpinning recent progress in classical verification of quantum computation. While such tests can be based on cryptographic assumptions, known constructions rely on highly structured assumptions, e.g. trapdoor claw-free functions.
In this work, we seek to explain this state of affairs by constructing strong cryptography from (certain forms of) classical tests of anti-commutation. In particular, we formulate the notion of a test of non-commutation (ToNC), an interactive protocol between a quantum prover and classical verifier in which the prover's final-round response is obtained by measuring one of two binary observables $P_0,P_1$ depending on the verifier's challenge bit $c$. We prove that, for a broad range of parameters, ToNC implies classical-communication key agreement (KA), and ToNC combined with one-way functions implies oblivious transfer (OT).
Along the way, we develop tools for and provide the first known results on hardness amplification for post-quantum KA and OT, where communication is classical but adversaries may be quantum. In particular, we prove the following results of independent interest.
- Post-quantum hard-core measure theorem: For any efficiently sampleable high-min-entropy distribution $D$ over pairs $(x,b)$ such that quantum circuits have advantage at most $δ$ in predicting $b$ from $x$, there exists a sub-distribution $M\preceq D$ of density $(1-δ)$ on which $b$ is nearly optimally quantum-hard to predict.
- Post-quantum interactive XOR lemma: Given any classically-interactive protocol, if quantum adversaries have advantage at most $δ$ in guessing a private challenger bit $b$, then two sequential repetitions reduce the advantage for predicting the XOR of the challenger bits $b_1\oplus b_2$ to at most $δ^2+\rm{negl}(λ)$.
Classically testing for the presence of anti-commuting operators on a quantum device is a critical tool underpinning recent progress in classical verification of quantum computation. While such tests can be based on cryptographic assumptions, known constructions rely on highly structured assumptions, e.g. trapdoor claw-free functions.
In this work, we seek to explain this state of affairs by constructing strong cryptography from (certain forms of) classical tests of anti-commutation. In particular, we formulate the notion of a test of non-commutation (ToNC), an interactive protocol between a quantum prover and classical verifier in which the prover's final-round response is obtained by measuring one of two binary observables P0,P1 depending on the verifier's challenge bit c. We prove that, for a broad range of parameters, ToNC implies classical-communication key agreement (KA), and ToNC combined with one-way functions implies oblivious transfer (OT).
Along the way, we develop tools for and provide the first known results on hardness amplification for post-quantum KA and OT, where communication is classical but adversaries may be quantum. In particular, we prove the following results of independent interest.
Post-quantum hard-core measure theorem: For any efficiently sampleable high-min-entropy distribution D over pairs (x,b) such that quantum circuits have advantage at most δ in predicting b from x, there exists a sub-distribution M⪯D of density (1−δ) on which b is nearly optimally quantum-hard to predict.
Post-quantum interactive XOR lemma: Given any classically-interactive protocol, if quantum adversaries have advantage at most δ in guessing a private challenger bit b, then two sequential repetitions reduce the advantage for predicting the XOR of the challenger bits b1⊕b2 to at most δ2+negl(λ).
Properties of quantum mechanics such as entanglement and the no-cloning theorem enable new forms of cryptography that are unattainable in classical models of computation. Quantum information, however, is harder to process, store, and transmit than classical information. As such, it is desirable to construct semi-quantum cryptographic protocols where only a subset of the parties have quantum capabilities while the rest operate classically. In this dissertation, we analyze the security of semi-quantum protocols based on two approaches: (i) nonlocality-based techniques and (ii) the hardness of the Learning with Errors (LWE) problem. In the first part of the dissertation, we leverage a form of Bell test to construct a quantum position verification (QPV) protocol. Initial QPV protocols required verifiers to prepare and send quantum states to an honest prover to achieve security against adversaries with bounded memory or entanglement. Later work constructed QPV protocols with classical verifiers but required additional assumptions such as the hardness of LWE or of random circuit sampling. We construct a variant of QPV where classical verifiers verify the spatial locations of two provers. We use the nonlocal correlations produced by the two provers to show security against adversaries with bounded quantum memory without making any computational intractability assumptions. In the second part of the dissertation, we use trapdoor claw-free functions (TCFs) to construct semi-quantum cryptographic protocols. TCFs, which are constructible from the hardness of LWE, have been shown to be immensely valuable in the construction of classically verifiable quantum cryptographic protocols. As opposed to previous work where the server is asked to prepare a claw state and perform Pauli-X and Z measurements, we use a technique that leverages the entire range of qubit measurements on the XY-plane. We use this technique to construct three protocols: (i) a one-round blind remote state preparation protocol that delegates the preparation of an arbitrary state on the XY-plane up to a Pauli-X correction; (ii) a two-round proof of quantumness whose security is directly in terms of the hardness of LWE and only requires the prover to prepare and measure a single claw state; and (iii) a 1-of-2 Puzzle with a single qubit auxiliary state.
A proof of quantumness is a method for provably demonstrating (to a classical verifier) that a quantum device can perform computational tasks that a classical device with comparable resources cannot. Providing a proof of quantumness is the first step towards constructing a useful quantum computer. There are currently three approaches for exhibiting proofs of quantumness: (i) Inverting a classically-hard one-way function (e.g. using Shor's algorithm). This seems technologically out of reach. (ii) Sampling from a classically-hard-to-sample distribution (e.g. BosonSampling). This may be within reach of near-term experiments, but for all such tasks known verification requires exponential time. (iii) Interactive protocols based on cryptographic assumptions. The use of a trapdoor scheme allows for efficient verification, and implementation seems to require much less resources than (i), yet still more than (ii). In this work we propose a significant simplification to approach (iii) by employing the random oracle heuristic. (We note that we do not apply the Fiat-Shamir paradigm.) We give a two-message (challenge-response) proof of quantumness based on any trapdoor claw-free function. In contrast to earlier proposals we do not need an adaptive hard-core bit property. This allows the use of smaller security parameters and more diverse computational assumptions (such as Ring Learning with Errors), significantly reducing the quantum computational effort required for a successful demonstration.
Founding Quantum Cryptography on Quantum Advantage, or, Towards Cryptography from #P-Hardness
Recent oracle separations [Kretschmer, TQC'21, Kretschmer et. al., STOC'23] have raised the tantalizing possibility of building quantum cryptography from sources of hardness that persist even if the polynomial hierarchy collapses. We realize this possibility by building quantum bit commitments and secure computation from unrelativized, well-studied mathematical problems that are conjectured to be hard for P#P -- such as approximating the permanents of complex Gaussian matrices, or approximating the output probabilities of random quantum circuits. Indeed, we show that as long as any one of the conjectures underlying sampling-based quantum advantage (e.g., BosonSampling, Random Circuit Sampling, IQP, etc.) is true, quantum cryptography can be based on the extremely mild assumption that P#P⊆(io)BQP/qpoly. We prove that the following hardness assumptions are equivalent. (1) The hardness of approximating the probability assigned to a randomly chosen string in the support of certain efficiently sampleable distributions (upto inverse polynomial multiplicative error).(2) The existence of one-way puzzles, where a quantum sampler outputs a pair of classical strings -- a puzzle and its key -- and where the hardness lies in finding the key corresponding to a random puzzle. These are known to imply quantum bit commitments [Khurana and Tomer, STOC'24]. (3) The existence of state puzzles, or one-way state synthesis, where it is hard to synthesize a secret quantum state given a public classical identifier. These capture the hardness of search problems with quantum inputs (secrets) and classical outputs (challenges). These are the first constructions of quantum cryptographic primitives (one-way puzzles, quantum bit commitments, state puzzles) from concrete, well-founded mathematical assumptions that do not imply the existence of classical cryptography.
Post-quantum cryptography currently rests on a small number of hardness assumptions, posing significant risks should any one of them be compromised. This vulnerability motivates the search for new and cryptographically versatile assumptions that make a convincing case for quantum hardness. In this work, we argue that decoding random quantum stabilizer codes---a quantum analog of the well-studied LPN problem---is an excellent candidate. This task occupies a unique middle ground: it is inherently native to quantum computation, yet admits an equivalent formulation with purely classical input and output, as recently shown by Khesin et al. (STOC '26). We prove that the average-case hardness of quantum stabilizer decoding implies the core primitives of classical Cryptomania, including public-key encryption (PKE) and oblivious transfer (OT), as well as one-way functions. Our constructions are moreover practically efficient: our PKE scheme achieves essentially the same efficiency as state-of-the-art LPN-based PKE. We also provide substantial evidence that stabilizer decoding does not reduce to LPN, suggesting that the former problem constitutes a genuinely new post-quantum assumption. Our primary technical contributions are twofold. First, we give a reduction from random quantum stabilizer decoding to an average-case problem closely resembling LPN, but which is equipped with additional symplectic algebraic structure. While this structure is essential to the quantum nature of the problem, it raises significant barriers to cryptographic security reductions. Second, we develop a new suite of scrambling techniques for such structured linear spaces, and use them to produce rigorous security proofs for all of our constructions.
Quantum computers promise to offer a considerable speed-up in solving certain problems, compared to the best classical algorithms. In many instances, the gap between quantum and classical running times is conjectured to be exponential. While this is great news for those applications where quantum computers would provide such an advantage, it also raises a significant challenge: how can classical computers verify the correctness of quantum computations? In attempting to answer this question, a number of protocols have been developed in which a classical client (referred to as verifier) can interact with one or more quantum servers (referred to as provers) in order to certify the correctness of a quantum computation performed by the server(s). These protocols are of one of two types: either there are multiple non-communicating provers, sharing entanglement, and the verifier is completely classical; or, there is a single prover and the classical verifier has a device for preparing or measuring quantum states. The latter type of protocols are, arguably, more relevant to near term quantum computers, since having multiple quantum computers that share a large amount of entanglement is, from a technological standpoint, extremely challenging. Before the realisation of practical single-prover protocols, a number of challenges need to be addressed: how robust are these protocols to noise on the verifier's device? Can the protocols be made fault-tolerant without significantly increasing the requirements of the verifier? How do we know that the verifier's device is operating correctly? Could this device be eliminated completely, thus having a protocol with a fully classical verifier and a single quantum prover? Our work attempts to provide answers to these questions. First, we consider a single-prover verification protocol developed by Fitzsimons and Kashefi and show that this protocol is indeed robust with respect to deviations on the quantum state prepared by the verifier. We show that this is true even if those deviations are the result of a correlation with the prover's system. We then use this result to give a verification protocol which is device- independent. The protocol consists of a verifier with a measurement device and a single prover. Device-independence means that the verifier need not trust the measurement device (nor the prover) which can be assumed to be fully malicious (though not communicating with the prover). A key element in realising this protocol is a robust technique of Reichardt, Unger and Vazirani for testing, using non-local correlations, that two untrusted devices share a large number of entangled states. This technique is referred to as rigidity of non-local correlations. Our second result is to prove a rigidity result for a type of quantum correlations known as steering correlations. To do this, we first show that steering correlations can be used in order to certify maximally entangled states, in a setting in which each test is independent of the previous one. We also show that the fidelity with which we characterise the state, in this specific test, is optimal. We then improve the previous result by removing the independence assumption. This then leads to our desired rigidity result. We make use of it, in a similar fashion to the device-independent case, in order to give a verification protocol that is one-sided device-independent. The importance of this application is to show how different trust assumptions affect the efficiency of the protocol. Next, we describe a protocol for fault-tolerantly verifying quantum computations, with minimal "quantum requirements" for the verifier. Specifically, the verifier only requires a device for measuring single-qubit states. Both this device, and the prover's operations are assumed to be prone to errors. We show that under standard assumptions about the error model, it is possible to achieve verification of quantum computation using fault-tolerant principles. As a proof of principle, and to better illustrate the inner workings of the protocol, we describe a toy implementation of the protocol in a quantum simulator, and present the results we obtained, when running it for a small computation. Finally, we explore the possibility of having a verification protocol, with a classical verifier and a single prover, such that the prover is blind with respect to the verifier's computation. We give evidence that this is not possible. In fact, our result is only concerned with blind quantum computation with a classical client, and uses complexity theoretic results to argue why it is improbable for such a protocol to exist. We then use these complexity theoretic techniques to show that a client, with the ability to prepare and send quantum states to a quantum server, would not be able to delegate arbitrary NP problems to that server. In other words, even a client with quantum capabilities cannot exploit those capabilities to delegate the computation of NP problems, while keeping the input, to that computation, private. This is again true, provided certain complexity theoretic conjectures are true.
We consider a new model for the testing of untrusted quantum devices, consisting of a single polynomial time bounded quantum device interacting with a classical polynomial time verifier. In this model, we propose solutions to two tasks—a protocol for efficient classical verification that the untrusted device is “truly quantum” and a protocol for producing certifiable randomness from a single untrusted quantum device. Our solution relies on the existence of a new cryptographic primitive for constraining the power of an untrusted quantum device: post-quantum secure trapdoor claw-free functions that must satisfy an adaptive hardcore bit property. We show how to construct this primitive based on the hardness of the learning with errors (LWE) problem.