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

arXiv:quant-ph/0004017

Quantum Bit Escrow

Dorit Aharonov, Amnon Ta‐Shma, Umesh V. Vazirani, Andrew Chi-Chih Yao

Published Apr 4, 2000• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Unconditionally secure bit commitment and coin flipping are known to be impossible in the classical world. Bit commitment is known to be impossible also in the quantum world. We introduce a related new primitive - {\em quantum bit escrow}. In this primitive Alice commits to a bit $b$ to Bob. The commitment is {\em binding} in the sense that if Alice is asked to reveal the bit, Alice can not bias her commitment without having a good probability of being detected cheating. The commitment is {\em sealing} in the sense that if Bob learns information about the encoded bit, then if later on he is asked to prove he was playing honestly, he is detected cheating with a good probability. Rigorously proving the correctness of quantum cryptographic protocols has proved to be a difficult task. We develop techniques to prove quantitative statements about the binding and sealing properties of the quantum bit escrow protocol. A related primitive we construct is a quantum biased coin flipping protocol where no player can control the game, i.e., even an all-powerful cheating player must lose with some constant probability, which stands in sharp contrast to the classical world where such protocols are impossible.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0004017

Related papers

Quantum Bit Escrow

Dorit Aharonov, Amnon Ta‐Shma, Umesh V. Vazirani +1 more

Unconditionally secure bit commitment and coin flipping are known to be impossible in the classical world. Bit commitment is known to be impossible also in the quantum world. We introduce a related new primitive - {\em quantum bit escrow}. In this primitive Alice commits to a bit $b$ to Bob. The commitment is {\em binding} in the sense that if Alice is asked to reveal the bit, Alice can not bias her commitment without having a good probability of being detected cheating. The commitment is {\em sealing} in the sense that if Bob learns information about the encoded bit, then if later on he is asked to prove he was playing honestly, he is detected cheating with a good probability. Rigorously proving the correctness of quantum cryptographic protocols has proved to be a difficult task. We develop techniques to prove quantitative statements about the binding and sealing properties of the quantum bit escrow protocol. A related primitive we construct is a quantum biased coin flipping protocol where no player can control the game, i.e., even an all-powerful cheating player must lose with some constant probability, which stands in sharp contrast to the classical world where such protocols are impossible.

•Apr 4, 2000•0 citations

Using quantum oblivious transfer to cheat sensitive quantum bit commitment

Andreas Jakoby, Maciej Liśkiewicz, Aleksander Mądry

It is well known that unconditionally secure bit commitment is impossible even in the quantum world. In this paper a weak variant of quantum bit commitment, introduced independently by Aharonov et al. [STOC, 2000] and Hardy and Kent [Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004)] is investigated. In this variant, the parties require some nonzero probability of detecting a cheating, i.e. if Bob, who commits a bit b to Alice, changes his mind during the revealing phase then Alice detects the cheating with a positive probability (we call this property binding); and if Alice gains information about the committed bit before the revealing phase then Bob discovers this with positive probability (sealing). In our paper we give quantum bit commitment scheme that is simultaneously binding and sealing and we show that if a cheating gives epsilon advantage to a malicious Alice then Bob can detect the cheating with a probability Omega(epsilon^2). If Bob cheats then Alice's probability of detecting the cheating is greater than some fixed constant lambda>0. This improves the probabilities of cheating detections shown by Hardy and Kent and the scheme by Aharonov et al. who presented a protocol that is either binding or sealing, but not simultaneously both. To construct a cheat sensitive quantum bit commitment scheme we use a protocol for a weak quantum one-out-of-two oblivious transfer.

arXiv:quant-ph/0605150•May 17, 2006•1 citation

Physical Limitations of Quantum Cryptographic Primitives or Optimal Bounds for Quantum Coin Flipping and Bit Commitment

André Chailloux, Iordanis Kerenidis

Coin flipping and bit commitment are two fundamental cryptographic primitives with numerous applications. Quantum information allows for such protocols in the information theoretic setting where no dishonest party can perfectly cheat. The previously best-known quantum coin flipping and bit commitment protocol by Ambainis achieved a cheating probability of at most 3/4 [A. Ambainis, Proceedings of the $30$th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Washington, DC, IEEE Computer Society, 2001]. On the other hand, Kitaev showed that no quantum coin flipping or bit commitment protocol can have cheating probability less than $1/\sqrt{2}$ [A. Kitaev, Presentation at the $6$th Workshop on Quantum Information Processing (QIP), 2003]. Closing these gaps has been one of the important open questions in quantum cryptography. In this paper, we resolve both questions. First, we present a quantum strong coin flipping protocol with cheating probability arbitrarily close to $1/\sqrt{2}$. More precisely, we show how to use any weak coin flipping protocol with cheating probability $1/2+\varepsilon$ in order to achieve a strong coin flipping protocol with cheating probability $1/\sqrt{2}+O(\varepsilon)$. The optimal quantum strong coin flipping protocol follows from our construction and the optimal quantum weak coin flipping protocol described by [C. Mochon, arXiv:0711.4114, 2007]. Second, we provide the optimal bound for quantum bit commitment. On the one hand, we show a lower bound of approximately $\gamma \approx 0.739$, improving Kitaev's lower bound. On the other hand, we present an optimal quantum bit commitment protocol which has cheating probability arbitrarily close to $\gamma$. More precisely, we show how to use any weak coin flipping protocol with cheating probability $1/2 + \varepsilon$ in order to achieve a quantum bit commitment protocol with cheating probability $\gamma + O(\varepsilon)$. To obtain the final protocol, we then use the optimal quantum weak coin flipping protocol described by [C. Mochon, arXiv:0711.4114, 2007]. Unlike the previous protocol for coin flipping, our protocol uses quantum effects beyond the weak coin flip. To stress this fact, we additionally show that any classical bit commitment protocol with access to perfect weak (or strong) coin flipping has cheating probability at least 3/4.

SIAM Journal on Computing•Jan 1, 2017•2 citations

Optimal Bounds for Quantum Bit Commitment

André Chailloux, Iordanis Kerenidis

Bit commitment is a fundamental cryptographic primitive with numerous applications. Quantum information allows for bit commitment schemes in the information theoretic setting where no dishonest party can perfectly cheat. The previously best-known quantum protocol by Ambainis achieved a cheating probability of at most 3/4. On the other hand, Kitaev showed that no quantum protocol can have cheating probability less than 1/√2 (his lower bound on coin flipping can be easily extended to bit commitment). Closing this gap has since been an important open question. In this paper, we provide the optimal bound for quantum bit commitment. First, we show a lower bound of approximately 0.739, improving Kitaev's lower bound. For this, we present some generic cheating strategies for Alice and Bob and conclude by proving a new relation between the trace distance and fidelity of two quantum states. Second, we present an optimal quantum bit commitment protocol which has cheating probability arbitrarily close to 0.739. More precisely, we show how to use any weak coin flipping protocol with cheating probability 1/2 + ε in order to achieve a quantum bit commitment protocol with cheating probability 0.739 + O(ε). We then use the optimal quantum weak coin flipping protocol described by Mochon. Last, in order to stress the fact that our protocol uses quantum effects beyond the weak coin flip, we show that any classical bit commitment protocol with access to perfect weak (or strong) coin flipping has cheating probability at least 3/4.

Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science•Oct 1, 2011•49 citations

Possibility, impossibility, and cheat sensitivity of quantum-bit string commitment

Harry Buhrman, Matthias Christandl, Patrick M. Hayden +2 more

Unconditionally secure nonrelativistic bit commitment is known to be impossible in both the classical and the quantum worlds. But when committing to a string of $n$ bits at once, how far can we stretch the quantum limits? In this paper, we introduce a framework for quantum schemes where Alice commits a string of $n$ bits to Bob in such a way that she can only cheat on $a$ bits and Bob can learn at most $b$ bits of information before the reveal phase. Our results are twofold: we show by an explicit construction that in the traditional approach, where the reveal and guess probabilities form the security criteria, no good schemes can exist: $a+b$ is at least $n$. If, however, we use a more liberal criterion of security, the accessible information, we construct schemes where $a=4\text{ }{\text{log}}_{2}\text{ }n+O(1)$ and $b=4$, which is impossible classically. We furthermore present a cheat-sensitive quantum bit string commitment protocol for which we give an explicit tradeoff between Bob's ability to gain information about the committed string, and the probability of him being detected cheating.

arXiv:quant-ph/0504078•Physical Review A•Aug 11, 2008•63 citations

Honest-binding quantum bit commitment from separable operations

Ziad Chaoui, Anna Pappa, Matteo Rosati

Bit commitment is a fundamental cryptographic primitive and a cornerstone for numerous two-party cryptographic protocols, including zero-knowledge proofs. However, it has been proven that unconditionally secure bit commitment, both classical and quantum, is impossible. In this work, we demonstrate that imposing a restriction on the committing party to perform only separable operations enables secure quantum bit-commitment schemes. Specifically, we prove that in any perfectly hiding bit-commitment protocol, an honestly committing party limited to separable operations will be detected with high probability if they attempt to alter their commitment. To illustrate our findings, we present an example protocol.

arXiv:2501.07351•Physical Review A•May 5, 2026•1 citation
Unconditionally secure bit commitment and coin flipping are known to be impossible in the classical world. Bit commitment is known to be impossible also in the quantum world. We introduce a related new primitive - {\em quantum bit escrow}. In this primitive Alice commits to a bit bbb to Bob. The commitment is {\em binding} in the sense that if Alice is asked to reveal the bit, Alice can not bias her commitment without having a good probability of being detected cheating. The commitment is {\em sealing} in the sense that if Bob learns information about the encoded bit, then if later on he is asked to prove he was playing honestly, he is detected cheating with a good probability. Rigorously proving the correctness of quantum cryptographic protocols has proved to be a difficult task. We develop techniques to prove quantitative statements about the binding and sealing properties of the quantum bit escrow protocol. A related primitive we construct is a quantum biased coin flipping protocol where no player can control the game, i.e., even an all-powerful cheating player must lose with some constant probability, which stands in sharp contrast to the classical world where such protocols are impossible.
Unconditionally secure bit commitment and coin flipping are known to be impossible in the classical world. Bit commitment is known to be impossible also in the quantum world. We introduce a related new primitive - {\em quantum bit escrow}. In this primitive Alice commits to a bit bbb to Bob. The commitment is {\em binding} in the sense that if Alice is asked to reveal the bit, Alice can not bias her commitment without having a good probability of being detected cheating. The commitment is {\em sealing} in the sense that if Bob learns information about the encoded bit, then if later on he is asked to prove he was playing honestly, he is detected cheating with a good probability. Rigorously proving the correctness of quantum cryptographic protocols has proved to be a difficult task. We develop techniques to prove quantitative statements about the binding and sealing properties of the quantum bit escrow protocol. A related primitive we construct is a quantum biased coin flipping protocol where no player can control the game, i.e., even an all-powerful cheating player must lose with some constant probability, which stands in sharp contrast to the classical world where such protocols are impossible.
It is well known that unconditionally secure bit commitment is impossible even in the quantum world. In this paper a weak variant of quantum bit commitment, introduced independently by Aharonov et al. [STOC, 2000] and Hardy and Kent [Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004)] is investigated. In this variant, the parties require some nonzero probability of detecting a cheating, i.e. if Bob, who commits a bit b to Alice, changes his mind during the revealing phase then Alice detects the cheating with a positive probability (we call this property binding); and if Alice gains information about the committed bit before the revealing phase then Bob discovers this with positive probability (sealing). In our paper we give quantum bit commitment scheme that is simultaneously binding and sealing and we show that if a cheating gives epsilon advantage to a malicious Alice then Bob can detect the cheating with a probability Omega(epsilon^2). If Bob cheats then Alice's probability of detecting the cheating is greater than some fixed constant lambda>0. This improves the probabilities of cheating detections shown by Hardy and Kent and the scheme by Aharonov et al. who presented a protocol that is either binding or sealing, but not simultaneously both. To construct a cheat sensitive quantum bit commitment scheme we use a protocol for a weak quantum one-out-of-two oblivious transfer.
Coin flipping and bit commitment are two fundamental cryptographic primitives with numerous applications. Quantum information allows for such protocols in the information theoretic setting where no dishonest party can perfectly cheat. The previously best-known quantum coin flipping and bit commitment protocol by Ambainis achieved a cheating probability of at most 3/4 [A. Ambainis, Proceedings of the 303030th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, Washington, DC, IEEE Computer Society, 2001]. On the other hand, Kitaev showed that no quantum coin flipping or bit commitment protocol can have cheating probability less than 1/21/\sqrt{2}1/2​ [A. Kitaev, Presentation at the 666th Workshop on Quantum Information Processing (QIP), 2003]. Closing these gaps has been one of the important open questions in quantum cryptography. In this paper, we resolve both questions. First, we present a quantum strong coin flipping protocol with cheating probability arbitrarily close to 1/21/\sqrt{2}1/2​. More precisely, we show how to use any weak coin flipping protocol with cheating probability 1/2+ε1/2+\varepsilon1/2+ε in order to achieve a strong coin flipping protocol with cheating probability 1/2+O(ε)1/\sqrt{2}+O(\varepsilon)1/2​+O(ε). The optimal quantum strong coin flipping protocol follows from our construction and the optimal quantum weak coin flipping protocol described by [C. Mochon, arXiv:0711.4114, 2007]. Second, we provide the optimal bound for quantum bit commitment. On the one hand, we show a lower bound of approximately γ≈0.739\gamma \approx 0.739γ≈0.739, improving Kitaev's lower bound. On the other hand, we present an optimal quantum bit commitment protocol which has cheating probability arbitrarily close to γ\gammaγ. More precisely, we show how to use any weak coin flipping protocol with cheating probability 1/2+ε1/2 + \varepsilon1/2+ε in order to achieve a quantum bit commitment protocol with cheating probability γ+O(ε)\gamma + O(\varepsilon)γ+O(ε). To obtain the final protocol, we then use the optimal quantum weak coin flipping protocol described by [C. Mochon, arXiv:0711.4114, 2007]. Unlike the previous protocol for coin flipping, our protocol uses quantum effects beyond the weak coin flip. To stress this fact, we additionally show that any classical bit commitment protocol with access to perfect weak (or strong) coin flipping has cheating probability at least 3/4.
Bit commitment is a fundamental cryptographic primitive with numerous applications. Quantum information allows for bit commitment schemes in the information theoretic setting where no dishonest party can perfectly cheat. The previously best-known quantum protocol by Ambainis achieved a cheating probability of at most 3/4. On the other hand, Kitaev showed that no quantum protocol can have cheating probability less than 1/√2 (his lower bound on coin flipping can be easily extended to bit commitment). Closing this gap has since been an important open question. In this paper, we provide the optimal bound for quantum bit commitment. First, we show a lower bound of approximately 0.739, improving Kitaev's lower bound. For this, we present some generic cheating strategies for Alice and Bob and conclude by proving a new relation between the trace distance and fidelity of two quantum states. Second, we present an optimal quantum bit commitment protocol which has cheating probability arbitrarily close to 0.739. More precisely, we show how to use any weak coin flipping protocol with cheating probability 1/2 + ε in order to achieve a quantum bit commitment protocol with cheating probability 0.739 + O(ε). We then use the optimal quantum weak coin flipping protocol described by Mochon. Last, in order to stress the fact that our protocol uses quantum effects beyond the weak coin flip, we show that any classical bit commitment protocol with access to perfect weak (or strong) coin flipping has cheating probability at least 3/4.
Unconditionally secure nonrelativistic bit commitment is known to be impossible in both the classical and the quantum worlds. But when committing to a string of nnn bits at once, how far can we stretch the quantum limits? In this paper, we introduce a framework for quantum schemes where Alice commits a string of nnn bits to Bob in such a way that she can only cheat on aaa bits and Bob can learn at most bbb bits of information before the reveal phase. Our results are twofold: we show by an explicit construction that in the traditional approach, where the reveal and guess probabilities form the security criteria, no good schemes can exist: a+ba+ba+b is at least nnn. If, however, we use a more liberal criterion of security, the accessible information, we construct schemes where a=4 log2 n+O(1)a=4\text{ }{\text{log}}_{2}\text{ }n+O(1)a=4 log2​ n+O(1) and b=4b=4b=4, which is impossible classically. We furthermore present a cheat-sensitive quantum bit string commitment protocol for which we give an explicit tradeoff between Bob's ability to gain information about the committed string, and the probability of him being detected cheating.
Bit commitment is a fundamental cryptographic primitive and a cornerstone for numerous two-party cryptographic protocols, including zero-knowledge proofs. However, it has been proven that unconditionally secure bit commitment, both classical and quantum, is impossible. In this work, we demonstrate that imposing a restriction on the committing party to perform only separable operations enables secure quantum bit-commitment schemes. Specifically, we prove that in any perfectly hiding bit-commitment protocol, an honestly committing party limited to separable operations will be detected with high probability if they attempt to alter their commitment. To illustrate our findings, we present an example protocol.