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

Unconditionally Secure Quantum Coin Tossing. (arXiv:quant-ph/9904078v2 UPDATED)

Dominic Mayers, Louis Salvail, Yoshie Chiba-Kohno

Published Feb 27, 2018• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

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 $1/2 + \xi$ where the bias $\xi$ 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.

Related papers

An introduction to quantum coin-tossing

C. Doescher, Michael Keyl

We review the quantum version of a well known problem of cryptography called coin tossing (``flipping a coin via telephone''). It can be regarded as a game where two remote players (who distrust each other) tries to generate a uniformly distributed random bit which is common to both parties. The only resource they can use to perform this task is a classical or quantum communication channel. In this paper we provide a general overview over such coin tossing protocols, concerning in particular their security.

arXiv:quant-ph/0206088•Jun 13, 2002•3 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

AN INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM COIN TOSSING

C. Doescher, Michael Keyl

We review the quantum version of a well known problem of cryptography called coin tossing ("flipping a coin via telephone"). It can be regarded as a game where two remote players (who distrust each other) try to generate a uniformly distributed random bit which is common to both parties. The only resource they can use to perform this task is a classical or quantum communication channel. In this paper we provide a general overview over such coin tossing protocols, concerning in particular their security.

Fluctuation and Noise Letters•Dec 1, 2002•10 citations

Quantum And Relativistic Protocols For Secure Multi-Party Computation

Roger Colbeck

After a general introduction, the thesis is divided into four parts. In the first, we discuss the task of coin tossing, principally in order to highlight the effect different physical theories have on security in a straightforward manner, but, also, to introduce a new protocol for non-relativistic strong coin tossing. This protocol matches the security of the best protocol known to date while using a conceptually different approach to achieve the task. In the second part variable bias coin tossing is introduced. This is a variant of coin tossing in which one party secretly chooses one of two biased coins to toss. It is shown that this can be achieved with unconditional security for a specified range of biases, and with cheat-evident security for any bias. We also discuss two further protocols which are conjectured to be unconditionally secure for any bias. The third section looks at other two-party secure computations for which, prior to our work, protocols and no-go theorems were unknown. We introduce a general model for such computations, and show that, within this model, a wide range of functions are impossible to compute securely. We give explicit cheating attacks for such functions. In the final chapter we discuss the task of expanding a private random string, while dropping the usual assumption that the protocol's user trusts her devices. Instead we assume that all quantum devices are supplied by an arbitrarily malicious adversary. We give two protocols that we conjecture securely perform this task. The first allows a private random string to be expanded by a finite amount, while the second generates an arbitrarily large expansion of such a string.

arXiv:0911.3814•Nov 19, 2009•267 citations

Cheat-Penalised Quantum Weak Coin-Flipping

Atul Singh Arora, Carl A. Miller, Mauro E. S. Morales +1 more

Coin-flipping is a fundamental task in two-party cryptography where two remote mistrustful parties wish to generate a shared uniformly random bit. While quantum protocols promising near-perfect security exist for weak coin-flipping -- when the parties want opposing outcomes -- it has been shown that they must be inefficient in terms of their round complexity, and it is an open question of how space efficient they can be. In this work, we consider a variant called cheat-penalised weak coin-flipping in which if a party gets caught cheating, they lose $Λ$ points (compared to $0$ in the standard definition). We find that already for a small cheating penalty, the landscape of coin-flipping changes dramatically. For example, with $Λ=0.01$, we exhibit a protocol where neither Alice nor Bob can bias the result in their favour beyond $1/2 + 10^{-8}$, which uses $24$ qubits and $10^{16}$ rounds of communication (provably $10^{7}$ times better than any weak coin-flipping protocol with matching security). For the same space requirements, we demonstrate how one can choose between lowering how much a malicious party can bias the result (down to $1/2 + 10^{-10}$) and reducing the rounds of communication (down to $25,180$), depending on what is preferred. To find these protocols, we make two technical contributions. First, we extend the point game-protocol correspondence introduced by Kitaev and Mochon, to incorporate: (i) approximate point games, (ii) the cheat-penalised setting, and (iii) round and space complexity. Second, we give the first (to the best of our knowledge) numerical algorithm for constructing (approximate) point games that correspond to high security and low complexity. Our results open up the possibility of having secure and practical quantum protocols for multiparty computation.

arXiv:2510.03218•Oct 3, 2025•0 citations

Experimental quantum tossing of a single coin

A T Nguyen, Julien Frison, Kien Phan Huy +1 more

The cryptographic protocol of coin tossing consists of two parties, Alice and Bob, who do not trust each other, but want to generate a random bit. If the parties use a classical communication channel and have unlimited computational resources, one of them can always cheat perfectly. If the parties use a quantum communication channel, there exist protocols such that neither party can cheat perfectly, although they may be able to significantly bias the coin. Here, we analyze in detail how the performance of a quantum coin tossing experiment should be compared to classical protocols, taking into account the inevitable experimental imperfections. We then report an all-optical fiber experiment in which a single coin is tossed whose randomness is higher than achievable by any classical protocol and present some easily realizable cheating strategies by Alice and Bob.

arXiv:0804.4411•New Journal of Physics•Aug 28, 2008•28 citations
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 + \xi1/2+ξ where the bias ξ\xiξ 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.
We review the quantum version of a well known problem of cryptography called coin tossing (``flipping a coin via telephone''). It can be regarded as a game where two remote players (who distrust each other) tries to generate a uniformly distributed random bit which is common to both parties. The only resource they can use to perform this task is a classical or quantum communication channel. In this paper we provide a general overview over such coin tossing protocols, concerning in particular their security.
We review the quantum version of a well known problem of cryptography called coin tossing ("flipping a coin via telephone"). It can be regarded as a game where two remote players (who distrust each other) try to generate a uniformly distributed random bit which is common to both parties. The only resource they can use to perform this task is a classical or quantum communication channel. In this paper we provide a general overview over such coin tossing protocols, concerning in particular their security.
After a general introduction, the thesis is divided into four parts. In the first, we discuss the task of coin tossing, principally in order to highlight the effect different physical theories have on security in a straightforward manner, but, also, to introduce a new protocol for non-relativistic strong coin tossing. This protocol matches the security of the best protocol known to date while using a conceptually different approach to achieve the task. In the second part variable bias coin tossing is introduced. This is a variant of coin tossing in which one party secretly chooses one of two biased coins to toss. It is shown that this can be achieved with unconditional security for a specified range of biases, and with cheat-evident security for any bias. We also discuss two further protocols which are conjectured to be unconditionally secure for any bias. The third section looks at other two-party secure computations for which, prior to our work, protocols and no-go theorems were unknown. We introduce a general model for such computations, and show that, within this model, a wide range of functions are impossible to compute securely. We give explicit cheating attacks for such functions. In the final chapter we discuss the task of expanding a private random string, while dropping the usual assumption that the protocol's user trusts her devices. Instead we assume that all quantum devices are supplied by an arbitrarily malicious adversary. We give two protocols that we conjecture securely perform this task. The first allows a private random string to be expanded by a finite amount, while the second generates an arbitrarily large expansion of such a string.
Coin-flipping is a fundamental task in two-party cryptography where two remote mistrustful parties wish to generate a shared uniformly random bit. While quantum protocols promising near-perfect security exist for weak coin-flipping -- when the parties want opposing outcomes -- it has been shown that they must be inefficient in terms of their round complexity, and it is an open question of how space efficient they can be. In this work, we consider a variant called cheat-penalised weak coin-flipping in which if a party gets caught cheating, they lose ΛΛΛ points (compared to 000 in the standard definition). We find that already for a small cheating penalty, the landscape of coin-flipping changes dramatically. For example, with Λ=0.01Λ=0.01Λ=0.01, we exhibit a protocol where neither Alice nor Bob can bias the result in their favour beyond 1/2+10−81/2 + 10^{-8}1/2+10−8, which uses 242424 qubits and 101610^{16}1016 rounds of communication (provably 10710^{7}107 times better than any weak coin-flipping protocol with matching security). For the same space requirements, we demonstrate how one can choose between lowering how much a malicious party can bias the result (down to 1/2+10−101/2 + 10^{-10}1/2+10−10) and reducing the rounds of communication (down to 25,18025,18025,180), depending on what is preferred. To find these protocols, we make two technical contributions. First, we extend the point game-protocol correspondence introduced by Kitaev and Mochon, to incorporate: (i) approximate point games, (ii) the cheat-penalised setting, and (iii) round and space complexity. Second, we give the first (to the best of our knowledge) numerical algorithm for constructing (approximate) point games that correspond to high security and low complexity. Our results open up the possibility of having secure and practical quantum protocols for multiparty computation.
The cryptographic protocol of coin tossing consists of two parties, Alice and Bob, who do not trust each other, but want to generate a random bit. If the parties use a classical communication channel and have unlimited computational resources, one of them can always cheat perfectly. If the parties use a quantum communication channel, there exist protocols such that neither party can cheat perfectly, although they may be able to significantly bias the coin. Here, we analyze in detail how the performance of a quantum coin tossing experiment should be compared to classical protocols, taking into account the inevitable experimental imperfections. We then report an all-optical fiber experiment in which a single coin is tossed whose randomness is higher than achievable by any classical protocol and present some easily realizable cheating strategies by Alice and Bob.