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/0505053 · Physical Review A

Comment on “Quantum key distribution for d -level systems with generalized Bell states”

Fei Gao, Fen-Zhuo Guo, Qiaoyan Wen, Fu-Chen Zhu

Published Dec 20, 2005• 32 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In the paper published in Phys. Rev. A 65, 052331 (2002), an entanglement-based quantum key distribution protocol for $d$-level systems was proposed. However, in this Comment, it is shown that this protocol is insecure for a special attack strategy.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.72.066301

Related papers

Reply to “Comment on ‘Quantum key distribution for d -level systems with generalized Bell states’ ”

Vahid Karimipour

In the preceding Comment it has been claimed that an entangled-based quantum key distribution protocol proposed by Zhang, Li, and Gao [Phys. Rev. A 64, 024302 (2001)] and its generalization to $d$-level systems by Karimipour, Bahraminasab, and Bagherinezhad [Phys. Rev. A 65, 052331 (2002)] are insecure against an attack devised by the authors of the Comment. We invalidate the arguments of the Comment and show that the protocols are still secure.

arXiv:quant-ph/0509189•Physical Review A•Dec 20, 2005•2 citations

Comment on “Quantum key distribution without alternative measurements” [Phys. Rev. A61, 052312 (2000)]

Yong-Sheng Zhang, Chuan‐Feng Li, Guang‐Can Guo

In a recent paper [A. Cabello, Phys. Rev. A 61, 052312 (2000)], a quantum key distribution protocol based on entanglement swapping was proposed. However, in this Comment, it is shown that this protocol is insecure if Eve uses a special strategy to attack.

arXiv:quant-ph/0009042•Physical Review A•Feb 13, 2001•100 citations

Reply to Comments on "Quantum Key Distribution for d-level systems for generalized Bell states" [Phys. Rev. A, 052331, (2002)] and "Quantum secret sharing based on a reusable Greenberger-Horne -Zeilinger states as secure carriers" [Phys. Rev. A, 67, 044302, (2003)]"

Vahid Karimipour

We show that the criticisms of two recent comments \\cite{ch1,ch2} on the insecurity of quantum key distributions proposed in \\cite{zhang} and \\cite{v1} and the secret sharing protocol proposed in \\cite{v2} are based on a misconception about the meaning of security and hence are invalid.

•Jun 17, 2005•2 citations

Addendum to “Quantum key distribution without alternative measurements”

Adán Cabello

Recently, Zhang, Li, and Guo have proposed a particular eavesdropping attack [Phys. Rev. A 63, 036301 (2001)] that shows that my quantum key distribution protocol based on entanglement swapping [Phys. Rev. A 61, 052312 (2000)] is insecure. However, security against this attack can be attained with a simple modification. In addition, a simpler version of the protocol using four qubits is introduced.

Physical Review A•Jun 26, 2001•17 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Quantum dense key distribution’ ”

Ivo Pietro Degiovanni, Ivano Ruo Berchera, Stefania Castelletto +4 more

In this Reply we propose a modified security proof of the quantum dense key distribution protocol, detecting also the eavesdropping attack proposed by W\'ojcik in his Comment [W\'ojcik, Phys. Rev. A 71, 016301 (2005)].

arXiv:quant-ph/0410221•Physical Review A•Jan 28, 2005•12 citations

Reply to “Comment on ‘Quantum key distribution without alternative measurements’ ” [Phys. Rev. A63, 036301 (2001)]

Adán Cabello

Recently, Zhang, Li, and Guo have proposed a particular eavesdropping attack [Phys. Rev. A {\bf 63}, 036301 (2001), quant-ph/0009042] which shows that my quantum key distribution protocol based on entanglement swapping [Phys. Rev. A {\bf 61}, 052312 (2000), quant-ph/9911025] is insecure. However, security against this attack can be attained with a simple modification. In addition, a simpler version of the protocol using four qubits is introduced.

arXiv:quant-ph/0009051•Physical Review A•Feb 13, 2001•32 citations
In the paper published in Phys. Rev. A 65, 052331 (2002), an entanglement-based quantum key distribution protocol for ddd-level systems was proposed. However, in this Comment, it is shown that this protocol is insecure for a special attack strategy.
In the preceding Comment it has been claimed that an entangled-based quantum key distribution protocol proposed by Zhang, Li, and Gao [Phys. Rev. A 64, 024302 (2001)] and its generalization to ddd-level systems by Karimipour, Bahraminasab, and Bagherinezhad [Phys. Rev. A 65, 052331 (2002)] are insecure against an attack devised by the authors of the Comment. We invalidate the arguments of the Comment and show that the protocols are still secure.