Cryptography is processing for securing communication between two people. The opponent wants to know the message that is encrypted using a secret key. Although the opponent can eavesdrop the message sent between the sender and the receiver, the opponent is unable to decrypt to read the message. Therefore, the secret key is very important. The sender and the receiver agree with the secret key in an insecure channel by using key distribution protocol such as the Diffie–Hellman protocol. Since quantum computer is coming soon, Diffie–Hellman protocol is not secure. We will develop a quantum key distribution protocol. The benefit of the quantum system is the quantum state that cannot copy by no‐cloning theorem. Thus, the opponent does not copy and keeps the message that is quantum. In this paper, a novel quantum key distribution protocol between two people (Alice and Bob) based on quantum operators is developed. The opponent (Eve) wants to know the secret key. Although Eve knows this quantum key distribution protocol, Eve does not behave similarly to Alice and Bob. For example, Eve eavesdrops Alice's quantum state that was sent to Bob, and Eve sends another quantum state. Therefore, we cannot control Eve's behavior. So we give the upper bound of mutual information between the user and opponent by using Holevo's bound. We verify the usual security definition for quantum key distribution that is equality‐and‐uniformity and privacy in the mutual information sense.
Cryptography is processing for securing communication between two people. The opponent wants to know the message that is encrypted using a secret key. Although the opponent can eavesdrop the message sent between the sender and the receiver, the opponent is unable to decrypt to read the message. Therefore, the secret key is very important. The sender and the receiver agree with the secret key in an insecure channel by using key distribution protocol such as the Diffie–Hellman protocol. Since quantum computer is coming soon, Diffie–Hellman protocol is not secure. We will develop a quantum key distribution protocol. The benefit of the quantum system is the quantum state that cannot copy by no‐cloning theorem. Thus, the opponent does not copy and keeps the message that is quantum. In this paper, a novel quantum key distribution protocol between two people (Alice and Bob) based on quantum operators is developed. The opponent (Eve) wants to know the secret key. Although Eve knows this quantum key distribution protocol, Eve does not behave similarly to Alice and Bob. For example, Eve eavesdrops Alice's quantum state that was sent to Bob, and Eve sends another quantum state. Therefore, we cannot control Eve's behavior. So we give the upper bound of mutual information between the user and opponent by using Holevo's bound. We verify the usual security definition for quantum key distribution that is equality‐and‐uniformity and privacy in the mutual information sense.
Quantum cryptography provides secret communication, which offers various security factors like confidentiality, integrity, and authentication assurance based on the law of physics. The law of physics states that quantum computing can also be applied into the communication sector, which is particularly in the field of cryptography. Then quantum can significantly distribute the data securely by applying quantum key distribution (QKD), quantum key sharing, etc. In the classical cryptography, it is difficult to compute secret keys using security concepts like key exchange and authentication, etc., and it fails to provide adequate protection during data communication as it needs some effective computation in terms of security. The lack of security in the data communication can be overcome by using the concept of quantum computing. Generally, in quantum computing, elementary quantum systems like polarized photons are used to transmit digital information based on the principle of uncertainty as it gives rise to a significant phenomenon of effective security in terms of communication compared to existing concepts related to cryptography. In quantum computing, the detection ratio for identifying the data which are sent through a communication channel is more difficult as it uses qubits and photons to represent the data that are sent. Quantum channels are used to distribute the information between two users as it passes through the unprotected classical channels as it is unknown to anyone else. Assuming that Alice and Bob use a latent noise channel to send a key, reconciliation is the process of correcting errors between Alice and Bob’s version of the key. This is done by public discussion, which leaks some information about the secret key to an undercover. This chapter gives a discussion on QKD concepts as it helps to provide a secure communication, where the information is broadcasting through a quantum channel. Finally, the various existing quantum protocols are described in relation to some security measures based on QKD, and the standard QKD protocol of BB84 is discussed.
It seems that quantum key distribution (QKD) may be completely insecure when the message sender Alice always encodes her key bits in a fixed basis. In this paper, we present a QKD protocol with classical Alice, i.e. Alice always encodes her key bit in the {|0〉,|1〉} basis (we call it classical {0,1} basis) and the eavesdropper Eve knows this fact. We prove that our protocol is completely robust against any eavesdropping attack and present the amount of tolerable noise against Eve's individual attack. Next, we present a QKD protocol to demonstrate that secure key bits can be distributed even if neither Alice nor Bob has quantum capacities, and extend this idea to a QKD network protocol with numerous parties who have only classical capacities. Finally, we discuss that quantum is necessary in QKD for security reasons, but both Alice and Bob may be classical.
Quantum key distribution allows two parties, traditionally known as Alice and Bob, to establish a secure random cryptographic key if, firstly, they have access to a quantum communication channel, and secondly, they can exchange classical public messages which can be monitored but not altered by an eavesdropper, Eve. Quantum key distribution provides perfect security because, unlike its classical counterpart, it relies on the laws of physics rather than on ensuring that successful eavesdropping would require excessive computational effort. However, security proofs of quantum key distribution are not trivial and are usually restricted in their applicability to specific protocols. In contrast, we present a general and conceptually simple proof which can be applied to a number of different protocols. It relies on the fact that a cryptographic procedure called privacy amplification is equally secure when an adversary's memory for data storage is quantum rather than classical.
Quantum key distribution (QKD) is considered as an ideal method to make secret message unreadable to eaves-dropper but intelligible to the two authorized parties of the communication [1][2][3][4][5][6].In the research of experimental quantum key distribution, single photons and entangled photon pairs are used as the carriers.In quantum key distribution, secret keys are generated first between the communication parties.The security of quantum key distribution is guaranteed by the laws of quantum mechanics.After the quantum key distribution is completed, the communication parties should share secret keys, then the sender encrypts the secret message using the secret keys to form the ciphertext and transmits the ciphertext through a classical channel.The receiver receives the ciphertext and then decrypt the ciphertext to get the secret message.Altogether there are four steps in a secret communication process with QKD: key generation, encryption, transmission and decryption.Here in this review, we review some new development in quantum communication, quantum direct communication (QDC).Quantum direct communication is a form of quantum communication where secret messages can be transmitted through a quantum channel with or without additional classical communications.There are two forms of quantum direct communication, quantum secure direct communication (QSDC) [7{9] and deterministic secure quantum communication (DSQC) [10,11].In QSDC, secret messages are transmitted directly between the communication parties, from sender Alice to receiver Bob, without additional classical communication except those for the necessary eavesdropping check.In other words, the quantum key distribution process and the classical communication of ciphertext are condensed into one single quantum communication procedure in QSDC.Deterministic secure quantum communication is another type of quantum direct communication, such as those proposed in Ref. [10,11], where classical communication is required in order to read out the secret message.As mentioned earlier, to complete a secure communication with the help of QKD, one usually encodes the secret message with an encryption scheme, and the ciphered text is transmitted through a classical channel.With a quantum channel, this procedure can be varied.
In quantum key distribution (QKD), Alice selects a sequence of characters from a finite alphabet and transmits the corresponding signals, each described by a quantum state, to Bob. Between Alice and Bob, Eve---with her own receiver and transmitter---can eavesdrop. Eve is assumed to know beforehand all the possible states from among which Alice chooses. The central question is: Can Eve gain significant information about the key without influencing what Bob receives in ways that Alice and Bob can detect? This formulation implies that many options are available to Eve. It is the purpose here to discuss one of these options, where extensive use is made of the Schrodinger equation with spatial variables. This procedure of Eve---which consists of letting the quantum state of Alice scatter from a quantum memory and then, using the information thus obtained, sending a suitably chosen quantum state to Bob---is discussed in detail. Furthermore, there are ways for Alice to defeat this procedure by an unusual choice of her quantum states. This counter-measure is also presented and discussed.