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

International Conference on Internet Technology and Applications

A Novel Quantum Coin Tossing Protocol Based on Quantum Public-Key Cryptosystem

Guanghui Liu, Dong Cao

Published Aug 1, 2011• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Quantum coin tossing is a simple cryptographic primitive with many applications in more complicated tasks and plays a crucial role in complex quantum cryptography protocol design. Coin tossing protocols in classical environment are often based on bit commitment protocol. It has been proved that unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment schemes are insecure. Therefore, quantum coin tossing based on quantum bit commitment protocol isn't unconditionally secure. In general, quantum coin tossing is strictly weaker than bit commitment. In this paper, we have proposed a quantum coin tossing protocol based on quantum public-key cryptosystems. According to quantum CSS codes, we constructed a class of quantum quasi-cyclic low-density parity-check codes, and then proposed a novel quantum coin tossing protocol. Security analysis show that the proposed protocols are more secure.

DOI
10.1109/itap.2011.6006143

Related papers

Proposal for founding mistrustful quantum cryptography on coin tossing

Adrian Kent

A significant branch of classical cryptography deals with the problems which arise when mistrustful parties need to generate, process, or exchange information. As Kilian showed a while ago, mistrustful classical cryptography can be founded on a single protocol, oblivious transfer, from which general secure multiparty computations can be built. The scope of mistrustful quantum cryptography is limited by no-go theorems, which rule out, inter alia, unconditionally secure quantum protocols for oblivious transfer or general secure two-party computations. These theorems apply even to protocols which take relativistic signaling constraints into account. The best that can be hoped for, in general, are quantum protocols which are computationally secure against quantum attack. Here a method is described for building a classically certified bit commitment, and hence every other mistrustful cryptographic task, from a secure coin-tossing protocol. No security proof is attempted, but reasons are sketched why these protocols might resist quantum computational attack.

arXiv:quant-ph/0111097•Physical Review A•Jul 15, 2003•3 citations

Founding Mistrustful Quantum Cryptography on Coin Tossing

Adrian Kent

A significant branch of classical cryptography deals with the problems which arise when mistrustful parties need to generate, process or exchange information. As Kilian showed a while ago, mistrustful classical cryptography can be founded on a single protocol, oblivious transfer, from which general secure multi-party computations can be built. The scope of mistrustful quantum cryptography is limited by no-go theorems, which rule out, inter alia, unconditionally secure quantum protocols for oblivious transfer or general secure two-party computations. These theorems apply even to protocols which take relativistic signalling constraints into account. The best that can be hoped for, in general, are quantum protocols computationally secure against quantum attack. I describe here a method for building a classically certified bit commitment, and hence every other mistrustful cryptographic task, from a secure coin tossing protocol. No security proof is attempted, but I sketch reasons why these protocols might resist quantum computational attack.

•Nov 19, 2001•0 citations

Why quantum bit commitment and ideal quantum coin tossing are impossible

Hoi‐Kwong Lo, H. F. Chau

There had been well known claims of ``provably unbreakable'' quantum protocols for bit commitment and coin tossing. However, we, and independently Mayers, showed that all proposed quantum bit commitment (and therefore coin tossing) schemes are, in principle, insecure because the sender, Alice, can always cheat successfully by using an EPR-type of attack and delaying her measurements. One might wonder if secure quantum bit commitment and coin tossing protocols exist at all. Here we prove that an EPR-type of attack by Alice will, in principle, break {\em any} realistic quantum bit commitment and {\em ideal} coin tossing scheme. Therefore, provided that Alice has a quantum computer and is capable of storing quantum signals for an arbitrary length of time, all those schemes are insecure. Since bit commitment and coin tossing are useful primitives for building up more sophisticated protocols such as zero-knowledge proofs, our results cast very serious doubt on the security of quantum cryptography in the so-called ``post-cold-war'' applications.

arXiv:quant-ph/9605026•May 16, 1996•7 citations

Quantum Coin Tossing

Won Young Hwang, In Gyu Koh, Yeong Deok Han

We show that a secure quantum protocol for coin tossing exist. The existence of quantum coin tossing support the conjecture of D.Mayers [Phys.Rev.Lett. 78, 3414(1997)] that only asymmetrical tasks as quantum bit commitment are impossible.

arXiv:quant-ph/9706046•Jun 20, 1997•2 citations

A New Protocol For Strong Coin Tossing

Roger Colbeck

In the literature, strong coin tossing protocols based on bit commitment have been proposed. Here we examine a protocol that instead tries to achieve the task by sharing entanglement securely. The protocol uses only qubits, and has bias 1/4. This is equal to the best known bias for bit commitment based schemes.

•Sep 5, 2006•0 citations

Unconditionally Secure Quantum Coin Tossing

Dominic Mayers, Louis Salvail, Yoshie Chiba-Kohno

In coin tossing two remote participants want to share a uniformly distributed random bit. At the least in the quantum version, each participant test whether or not the other has attempted to create a bias on this bit. It is requested that, for b = 0,1, the probability that Alice gets bit b and pass the test is smaller than 1/2 whatever she does, and similarly for Bob. If the bound 1/2 holds perfectly against any of the two participants, the task realised is called an exact coin tossing. If the bound is actually $1/2 + ξ$ where the bias $ξ$ vanishes when a security parameter m defined by the protocol increases, the task realised is a (non exact) coin tossing. It is found here that exact coin tossing is impossible. At the same time, an unconditionally secure quantum protocol that realises a (non exact) coin tossing is proposed. The protocol executes m biased quantum coin tossing procedures at the same time. It executes the first round in each of these m procedures sequentially, then the second rounds are executed, and so on until the end of the n procedures. Each procedure requires 4n particles where $n \in O(\lg m)$. The final bit x is the parity of the m random bits. The information about each of these m bits is announced a little bit at a time which implies that the principle used against bit commitment does not apply. The bias on x is smaller than $1/m$. The result is discussed in the light of the impossibility result for exact coin tossing.

arXiv:quant-ph/9904078•Apr 22, 1999•17 citations
Quantum coin tossing is a simple cryptographic primitive with many applications in more complicated tasks and plays a crucial role in complex quantum cryptography protocol design. Coin tossing protocols in classical environment are often based on bit commitment protocol. It has been proved that unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment schemes are insecure. Therefore, quantum coin tossing based on quantum bit commitment protocol isn't unconditionally secure. In general, quantum coin tossing is strictly weaker than bit commitment. In this paper, we have proposed a quantum coin tossing protocol based on quantum public-key cryptosystems. According to quantum CSS codes, we constructed a class of quantum quasi-cyclic low-density parity-check codes, and then proposed a novel quantum coin tossing protocol. Security analysis show that the proposed protocols are more secure.
A significant branch of classical cryptography deals with the problems which arise when mistrustful parties need to generate, process, or exchange information. As Kilian showed a while ago, mistrustful classical cryptography can be founded on a single protocol, oblivious transfer, from which general secure multiparty computations can be built. The scope of mistrustful quantum cryptography is limited by no-go theorems, which rule out, inter alia, unconditionally secure quantum protocols for oblivious transfer or general secure two-party computations. These theorems apply even to protocols which take relativistic signaling constraints into account. The best that can be hoped for, in general, are quantum protocols which are computationally secure against quantum attack. Here a method is described for building a classically certified bit commitment, and hence every other mistrustful cryptographic task, from a secure coin-tossing protocol. No security proof is attempted, but reasons are sketched why these protocols might resist quantum computational attack.
A significant branch of classical cryptography deals with the problems which arise when mistrustful parties need to generate, process or exchange information. As Kilian showed a while ago, mistrustful classical cryptography can be founded on a single protocol, oblivious transfer, from which general secure multi-party computations can be built. The scope of mistrustful quantum cryptography is limited by no-go theorems, which rule out, inter alia, unconditionally secure quantum protocols for oblivious transfer or general secure two-party computations. These theorems apply even to protocols which take relativistic signalling constraints into account. The best that can be hoped for, in general, are quantum protocols computationally secure against quantum attack. I describe here a method for building a classically certified bit commitment, and hence every other mistrustful cryptographic task, from a secure coin tossing protocol. No security proof is attempted, but I sketch reasons why these protocols might resist quantum computational attack.
There had been well known claims of ``provably unbreakable'' quantum protocols for bit commitment and coin tossing. However, we, and independently Mayers, showed that all proposed quantum bit commitment (and therefore coin tossing) schemes are, in principle, insecure because the sender, Alice, can always cheat successfully by using an EPR-type of attack and delaying her measurements. One might wonder if secure quantum bit commitment and coin tossing protocols exist at all. Here we prove that an EPR-type of attack by Alice will, in principle, break {\em any} realistic quantum bit commitment and {\em ideal} coin tossing scheme. Therefore, provided that Alice has a quantum computer and is capable of storing quantum signals for an arbitrary length of time, all those schemes are insecure. Since bit commitment and coin tossing are useful primitives for building up more sophisticated protocols such as zero-knowledge proofs, our results cast very serious doubt on the security of quantum cryptography in the so-called ``post-cold-war'' applications.
In coin tossing two remote participants want to share a uniformly distributed random bit. At the least in the quantum version, each participant test whether or not the other has attempted to create a bias on this bit. It is requested that, for b = 0,1, the probability that Alice gets bit b and pass the test is smaller than 1/2 whatever she does, and similarly for Bob. If the bound 1/2 holds perfectly against any of the two participants, the task realised is called an exact coin tossing. If the bound is actually 1/2+ξ1/2 + ξ1/2+ξ where the bias ξξξ vanishes when a security parameter m defined by the protocol increases, the task realised is a (non exact) coin tossing. It is found here that exact coin tossing is impossible. At the same time, an unconditionally secure quantum protocol that realises a (non exact) coin tossing is proposed. The protocol executes m biased quantum coin tossing procedures at the same time. It executes the first round in each of these m procedures sequentially, then the second rounds are executed, and so on until the end of the n procedures. Each procedure requires 4n particles where n∈O(lg⁡m)n \in O(\lg m)n∈O(lgm). The final bit x is the parity of the m random bits. The information about each of these m bits is announced a little bit at a time which implies that the principle used against bit commitment does not apply. The bias on x is smaller than 1/m1/m1/m. The result is discussed in the light of the impossibility result for exact coin tossing.