This article describes a quantum bit commitment protocol, QBC3, based on entanglement destruction via forced measurements and proves its unconditional security. Some comments on the current status of the field are also made.
Bit commitment involves the submission of evidence from one party to another so that the evidence can be used to confirm a later revealed bit value by the first party, while the second party cannot determine the bit value from the evidence alone. It is widely believed that secure quantum bit commitment is impossible due to quantum entanglement cheating, which is codified in a general impossibility theorem. In this paper, the scope of this general impossibility proof is extended and analyzed, and gaps are found. Three specific protocols are described for which the entanglement cheating as given in the impossibility proof fails to work. One of these protocols, QBC2, is proved to be unconditionally secure.
The relationship between the quantum bit commitment (QBC) and quantum seal (QS) is studied. It is elaborated that QBC and QS are not equivalent, but QS protocols satisfying a stronger unconditional security requirement can lead to an unconditionally secure QBC. In this sense, QS is strictly stronger than QBC in security requirements. Based on an earlier proposal on sealing a single bit, a feasible QBC protocol is also put forward, which is secure in practice even if the cheater has a strong quantum computational power.
The commitment of bits between two mutually distrustful parties is a powerful cryptographic primitive with which many cryptographic objectives can be achieved. It is widely believed that unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment is impossible due to quantum entanglement cheating, which is codified in a general impossibility theorem. Gaps in the proof of this impossibility theorem are found. An unconditionally secure bit commitment protocol utilizing anonymous quantum states and the no-clone theorem is presented below with a full security proof.