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/9806031

Defeating classical bit commitments with a quantum computer

Gilles Brassard A, Claude Crépeau, Dominic Mayers, Louis Salvail

Published Jun 9, 1998• 20 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

It has been recently shown by Mayers that no bit commitment scheme is secure if the participants have unlimited computational power and technology. However it was noticed that a secure protocol could be obtained by forcing the cheater to perform a measurement. Similar situations had been encountered previously in the design of Quantum Oblivious Transfer. The question is whether a classical bit commitment could be used for this specific purpose. We demonstrate that, surprisingly, classical unconditionally concealing bit commitments do not help.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9806031

Related papers

Unconditionally Secure Quantum Bit Commitment is Impossible

Dominic Mayers

The claim of quantum cryptography has always been that it can provide protocols that are unconditionally secure, that is, for which the security does not depend on any restriction on the time, space, or technology available to the cheaters. We show that this claim does not hold for any quantum bit commitment protocol. Since many cryptographic tasks use bit commitment as a basic primitive, this result implies a severe setback for quantum cryptography. The model used encompasses all reasonable implementations of quantum bit commitment protocols in which the participants have not met before, including those that make use of the theory of special relativity.

arXiv:quant-ph/9605044•Physical Review Letters•Apr 28, 1997•745 citations

A Quantum Bit Commitment Protocol Based on EPR States

M. Ardehali

A protocol for quantum bit commitment is proposed. The protocol is feasible with present technology and is secure against cheaters with unlimited computing power as long as the sender does not have the technology to store an EPR particle for an arbitrarily long period of time. The protocol is very efficient, requiring only tens of particles.

arXiv:quant-ph/9505019•May 26, 1995•5 citations

Why Quantum Bit Commitment And Ideal Quantum Coin Tossing Are Impossible

Hoi-kwong Lo, H. F. Chau

There had been well known claims of unconditionally secure quantum protocols for bit commitment. However, we, and independently Mayers, showed that all proposed quantum bit commitment schemes are, in principle, insecure because the sender, Alice, can almost always cheat successfully by using an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) type of attack and delaying her measurements. One might wonder if secure quantum bit commitment protocols exist at all. We answer this question by showing that the same type of attack by Alice will, in principle, break any bit commitment scheme. The cheating strategy generally requires a quantum computer. We emphasize the generality of this ``no-go theorem'': Unconditionally secure bit commitment schemes based on quantum mechanics---fully quantum, classical or quantum but with measurements---are all ruled out by this result. Since bit commitment is a useful primitive for building up more sophisticated protocols such as zero-knowledge proofs, our results cast very serious doubt on the security of quantum cryptography in the so-called ``post-cold-war'' applications. We also show that ideal quantum coin tossing is impossible because of the EPR attack. This no-go theorem for ideal quantum coin tossing may help to shed some lights on the possibility of non-ideal protocols.

•Jan 1, 1996•172 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/0605224•Physical Review A•Sep 26, 2007•105 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/9712023•Dec 10, 1997•25 citations

Secure quantum bit commitment against empty promises

Guang Ping He

The existence of unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment (QBC) is excluded by the Mayers-Lo-Chau no-go theorem. Here we look for the second-best: a QBC protocol that can defeat certain quantum attacks. By breaking the knowledge symmetry between the participants with quantum algorithm, a QBC protocol is proposed and is proven to be secure against a major kind of coherent attacks---the dummy attack, in which the participant makes an empty promise instead of committing to a specific bit. Therefore it surpasses previous QBC protocols which are secure against individual attacks only.

Physical Review A•Aug 31, 2006•14 citations
It has been recently shown by Mayers that no bit commitment scheme is secure if the participants have unlimited computational power and technology. However it was noticed that a secure protocol could be obtained by forcing the cheater to perform a measurement. Similar situations had been encountered previously in the design of Quantum Oblivious Transfer. The question is whether a classical bit commitment could be used for this specific purpose. We demonstrate that, surprisingly, classical unconditionally concealing bit commitments do not help.
The claim of quantum cryptography has always been that it can provide protocols that are unconditionally secure, that is, for which the security does not depend on any restriction on the time, space, or technology available to the cheaters. We show that this claim does not hold for any quantum bit commitment protocol. Since many cryptographic tasks use bit commitment as a basic primitive, this result implies a severe setback for quantum cryptography. The model used encompasses all reasonable implementations of quantum bit commitment protocols in which the participants have not met before, including those that make use of the theory of special relativity.
There had been well known claims of unconditionally secure quantum protocols for bit commitment. However, we, and independently Mayers, showed that all proposed quantum bit commitment schemes are, in principle, insecure because the sender, Alice, can almost always cheat successfully by using an Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) type of attack and delaying her measurements. One might wonder if secure quantum bit commitment protocols exist at all. We answer this question by showing that the same type of attack by Alice will, in principle, break any bit commitment scheme. The cheating strategy generally requires a quantum computer. We emphasize the generality of this ``no-go theorem'': Unconditionally secure bit commitment schemes based on quantum mechanics---fully quantum, classical or quantum but with measurements---are all ruled out by this result. Since bit commitment is a useful primitive for building up more sophisticated protocols such as zero-knowledge proofs, our results cast very serious doubt on the security of quantum cryptography in the so-called ``post-cold-war'' applications. We also show that ideal quantum coin tossing is impossible because of the EPR attack. This no-go theorem for ideal quantum coin tossing may help to shed some lights on the possibility of non-ideal protocols.
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.
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.
The existence of unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment (QBC) is excluded by the Mayers-Lo-Chau no-go theorem. Here we look for the second-best: a QBC protocol that can defeat certain quantum attacks. By breaking the knowledge symmetry between the participants with quantum algorithm, a QBC protocol is proposed and is proven to be secure against a major kind of coherent attacks---the dummy attack, in which the participant makes an empty promise instead of committing to a specific bit. Therefore it surpasses previous QBC protocols which are secure against individual attacks only.