arXiv:quant-ph/0209150

The quantum bit commitment: a complete classification of protocols

Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano

Published Sep 26, 2002• 1 citation

Abstract

This paper addresses the controversy between Mayers, Lo and Chau on one side, and Yuen on the opposite side, on whether there exist or not unconditionally secure protocols. For such purpose, a complete classification of all possible bit commitment protocols is given, including all possible cheating attacks. For the simplest class of protocols (non-aborting and with complete and perfect verification), it is shown how naturally a game-theoretical situation arises. For these protocols, bounds for the cheating probabilities are derived, which turn out to be different from those given in the impossibility proof. The whole classification and analysis has been carried out using a "finite open system" approach. The discrepancy with the impossibility proof is explained on the basis of the implicit adoption of a "closed system approach"--equivalent to modeling the commitment as performed by two fixed machines interacting unitarily in a overall "closed system". However, it is shown that the closed system approach for the classification of commitment protocols unavoidably leads to infinite dimensions, which then invalidate the continuity argument at the basis of the impossibility proof.

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0209150

Related papers

The quantum bit commitment: a finite open system approach for a complete classification of protocols

Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano

Mayers, Lo and Chau argued that all quantum bit commitment protocols are insecure, because there is no way to prevent an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) cheating attack. However, Yuen presented some protocols which challenged the previous impossibility argument. Up to now, it is still debated whether there exist or not unconditionally secure protocols. In this paper the above controversy is addressed. For such purpose, a complete classification of all possible bit commitment protocols is given, including all possible cheating attacks. Focusing on the simplest class of protocols (non-aborting and with complete and perfect verification), it is shown how naturally a game-theoretical situation arises. For these protocols, bounds for the cheating probabilities are derived, involving the two quantum operations encoding the bit values and their respective alternate Kraus decompositions. Such bounds are different from those given in the impossibility proof. The whole classification and analysis has been carried out using a "finite open system" approach. The discrepancy with the impossibility proof is explained on the basis of the implicit adoption of a "closed system approach"--equivalent to modeling the commitment as performed by two fixed machines interacting unitarily in a overall "closed system"--according to which it is possible to assume as "openly known" both the initial state and the probability distributions for all secret parameters, which can be then "purified". This approach is also motivated by existence of unitary extensions for any open system. However, it is shown that the closed system approach for the classification of commitment protocols unavoidably leads to infinite dimensions, which then invalidate the continuity argument at the basis of the impossibility proof.

arXiv:quant-ph/0209149Sep 26, 20021 citation

Quantum bit commitment and unconditional security

Horace P. Yuen

It is generally believed that unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment is impossible, due to widespread acceptance of an impossibility proof that utilizes quantum entaglement cheating. In this paper, we delineate how the impossibiliy proof formulation misses various types of quantum bit commitment protocols based on two-way quantum communications. We point out some of the gaps in the impossibility proof reasoning, and present corresponding counterexamples. Four different types of bit commitment protocols are constructed with several new protocol techniques. A specific Type 4 protocol is described and proved unconditionally secure. Security analysis of a Type 1 protocol and a Type 2 protocol are also sketched. The security of Type 3 protocols is as yet open. A development of quantum statistical decision theory and quantum games is needed to provie a complete security analysis of many such protocols.

arXiv:quant-ph/0207089Jul 16, 20024 citations

An Information-Theoretic Perspective on the Quantum Bit Commitment Impossibility Theorem

Marius Nagy, Naya Nagy

This paper proposes a different approach to pinpoint the causes for which an unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment protocol cannot be realized, beyond the technical details on which the proof of Mayers' no-go theorem is constructed. We have adopted the tools of quantum entropy analysis to investigate the conditions under which the security properties of quantum bit commitment can be circumvented. Our study has revealed that cheating the binding property requires the quantum system acting as the safe to harbor the same amount of uncertainty with respect to both observers (Alice and Bob) as well as the use of entanglement. Our analysis also suggests that the ability to cheat one of the two fundamental properties of bit commitment by any of the two participants depends on how much information is leaked from one side of the system to the other and how much remains hidden from the other participant.

EntropyMar 13, 20187 citations

A brief review on the impossibility of quantum bit commitment

Gilles Brassard A, Claude Crépeau, Dominic Mayers +1 more

The desire to obtain an unconditionally secure bit commitment protocol in quantum cryptography was expressed for the first time thirteen years ago. Bit commitment is sufficient in quantum cryptography to realize a variety of applications with unconditional security. In 1993, a quantum bit commitment protocol was proposed together with a security proof. However, a basic flaw in the protocol was discovered by Mayers in 1995 and subsequently by Lo and Chau. Later the result was generalized by Mayers who showed that unconditionally secure bit commitment is impossible. A brief review on quantum bit commitment which focuses on the general impossibility theorem and on recent attempts to bypass this result is provided.

arXiv:quant-ph/9712023Dec 10, 199725 citations

Reexamination of quantum bit commitment: The possible and the impossible

Giacomo Mauro D’Ariano, Dennis Kretschmann, Dirk Schlingemann +1 more

Bit commitment protocols whose security is based on the laws of quantum mechanics alone are generally held to be impossible. We give a strengthened and explicit proof of this result. We extend its scope to a much larger variety of protocols, which may have an arbitrary number of rounds, in which both classical and quantum information is exchanged, and which may include aborts and resets. Moreover, we do not consider the receiver to be bound to a fixed ``honest'' strategy, so that ``anonymous state protocols,'' which were recently suggested as a possible way to beat the known no-go results, are also covered. We show that any concealing protocol allows the sender to find a cheating strategy, which is universal in the sense that it works against any strategy of the receiver. Moreover, if the concealing property holds only approximately, the cheat goes undetected with a high probability, which we explicitly estimate. The proof uses an explicit formalization of general two-party protocols, which is applicable to more general situations, and an estimate about the continuity of the Stinespring dilation of a general quantum channel. The result also provides a natural characterization of protocols that fall outside the standard setting of unlimited available technology and thus may allow secure bit commitment. We present such a protocol whose security, perhaps surprisingly, relies on decoherence in the receiver's laboratory.

arXiv:quant-ph/0605224Physical Review ASep 26, 2007105 citations

Is quantum bit commitment really impossible

Jeong Woon Choi, Dowon Hong, Ku-Young Chang +2 more

Quantum bit commitment has been known to be impossible by the independent proofs of Mayers, and Lo and Chau, even though several quantum bit commitment protocols have been proposed. However, we here point out that their proof is available only for one-way quantum bit commitment protocols, and present a simple and efficient quantum bit commitment protocol with two-way quantum communications. The unconditional security of our protocol is guaranteed by the additional unknownness and randomness generated by both users.

Jan 9, 20090 citations