This note presents a method of public key distribution using quantum communication of n photons that simultaneously provides a high probability that the bits have not been tampered. It is a three-state variant of the quantum method of Bennett and Brassard (BB84) where the transmission states have been decreased from 4 to 3 and the detector states have been increased from 2 to 3. Under certain assumptions regarding method of attack, it provides superior performance (in terms of the number of usable key bits) for n < 18 m, where m is the number of key bits used to verify the integrity of the process in the BB84-protocol.
This note presents a method of public key distribution using quantum communication of n photons that simultaneously provides a high probability that the bits have not been tampered. It is a three-state variant of the quantum method of Bennett and Brassard (BB84) where the transmission states have been decreased from 4 to 3 and the detector states have been increased from 2 to 3. Under certain assumptions regarding method of attack, it provides superior performance (in terms of the number of usable key bits) for n < 18 m, where m is the number of key bits used to verify the integrity of the process in the BB84-protocol.
Standard security proofs of quantum-key-distribution (QKD) protocols often rely on symmetry arguments. In this paper, we prove the security of a three-state protocol that does not possess rotational symmetry. The three-state QKD protocol we consider involves three qubit states, where the first two states $\ensuremath{\mid}{0}_{z}⟩$ and $\ensuremath{\mid}{1}_{z}⟩$ can contribute to key generation, and the third state $\ensuremath{\mid}+⟩=(\ensuremath{\mid}{0}_{z}⟩+\ensuremath{\mid}{1}_{z}⟩)∕\sqrt{2}$ is for channel estimation. This protocol has been proposed and implemented experimentally in some frequency-based QKD systems where the three states can be prepared easily. Thus, by founding on the security of this three-state protocol, we prove that these QKD schemes are, in fact, unconditionally secure against any attacks allowed by quantum mechanics. The main task in our proof is to upper bound the phase error rate of the qubits given the bit error rates observed. Unconditional security can then be proved not only for the ideal case of a single-photon source and perfect detectors, but also for the realistic case of a phase-randomized weak coherent light source and imperfect threshold detectors. Our result in the phase error rate upper bound is independent of the loss in the channel. Also, we compare the three-state protocol with the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol. For the single-photon source case, our result proves that the BB84 protocol strictly tolerates a higher quantum bit error rate than the three-state protocol, while for the coherent-source case, the BB84 protocol achieves a higher key generation rate and secure distance than the three-state protocol when a decoy-state method is used.
Quantum cryptography, the principles of which are based on classical mechanics laws, solves exceptionally the issue of key distribution in classical cryptography. BB84, the first quantum key distribution created by Charles Bennett and Gilles Brassard in 1984 offers unconditional security and allows the transmission of a key with the length equal to the length of the message. According to Vernom, using the key with the above feature once together with an encryption algorithm leads to the formation of a most secure cryptographic system. The paper presents a method for improving the BB84 quantum protocol, using ten states of polarization, quantum memory and direct communication in both directions. The implementation of both the proposed method and the BB84 protocol was done through a C# application.
We devise a simple modification that essentially doubles the efficiency of a well-known quantum key distribution scheme proposed by Bennett and Brassard (BB84). Our scheme assigns significantly different probabilities for the different polarization bases during both transmission and reception to reduce the fraction of discarded data. The actual probabilities used in the scheme are announced in public. As the number of transmitted signals increases, the efficiency of our scheme can be made to approach 100%. An eavesdropper may try to break such a scheme by eavesdropping mainly along the predominant basis. To defeat such an attack, we perform a refined analysis of accepted data: Instead of lumping all the accepted data together to estimate a single error rate, we separate the accepted data into various subsets according to the basis employed and estimate an error rate for each subset individually.
We devise a simple modification that essentially doubles the efficiency of a well-known quantum key distribution scheme proposed by Bennett and Brassard (BB84). Our scheme assigns significantly different probabilities for the different polarization bases during both transmission and reception to reduce the fraction of discarded data. The actual probabilities used in the scheme are announced in public. As the number of transmitted signals increases, the efficiency of our scheme can be made to approach 100%. An eavesdropper may try to break such a scheme by eavesdropping mainly along the predominant basis. To defeat such an attack, we perform a refined analysis of accepted data: Instead of lumping all the accepted data together to estimate a single error rate, we separate the accepted data into various subsets according to the basis employed and estimate an error rate for each subset {\it individually}.
The Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol is the most widely implemented quantum key distribution (QKD) scheme. However, despite enormous theoretical and experimental efforts in the past decades, the security of this protocol with imperfect sources has not yet been rigorously established. In this paper, we address this shortcoming and prove the security of the BB84 protocol in the presence of multiple source imperfections, including state preparation flaws and side channels, such as Trojan-horse attacks, mode dependencies and classical correlations between the emitted pulses. To do so, we consider a modified BB84 protocol that exploits the basis mismatched events, which are often discarded in standard security analyses of this scheme; and employ the reference technique, a powerful mathematical tool to accommodate source imperfections in the security analysis of QKD. Moreover, we compare the achievable secret-key rate of the modified BB84 protocol with that of the three-state loss-tolerant protocol, and show that the addition of a fourth state, while redundant in ideal conditions, significantly improves the estimation of the leaked information in the presence of source imperfections, resulting in a better performance. This paper demonstrates the relevance of the BB84 protocol in guaranteeing implementation security, taking us a step further towards closing the existing gap between theory and practice of QKD.
We investigate the security of quantum key distribution with entangled photons, focusing on the two-photon variation of the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol proposed in 1992 by Bennett, Brasard, and Mermin (BBM92). We present a proof of security which applies to realistic sources, and to untrustable sources which can be placed outside the labs of the two receivers. The proof is restricted to individual eavesdropping attacks, and assumes that the detection apparatus is trustable. We find that the average collision probability for the BBM92 protocol is the same as that of the BB84 protocol with an ideal single-photon source. This indicates that there is no analog in BBM92 to photon splitting attacks, and that the source can be placed between the two receivers without changing the form of the collision probability. We then compare the communication rate of both protocols as a function of distance, and show that BBM92 has potential for much longer communication distances, up to 170 km, in the presence of realistic experimental imperfections. Finally, we propose a scheme based on entanglement swapping that can lead to even longer distance communication. The limiting factor in this scheme is the channel loss, which imposes very slow communication rates at longer distances.