Paper detail

Assumptions in Quantum Cryptography

Quantum cryptography uses techniques and ideas from physics and computer science. The combination of these ideas makes the security proofs of quantum cryptography a complicated task. To prove that a quantum-cryptography protocol is secure, assumptions are made about the protocol and its devices. If these assumptions are not justified in an implementation then an eavesdropper may break the security of the protocol. Therefore, security is crucially dependent on which assumptions are made and how justified the assumptions are in an implementation of the protocol. This thesis is primarily a review that analyzes and clarifies the connection between the security proofs of quantum-cryptography protocols and their experimental implementations. In particular, we focus on quantum key distribution: the task of distributing a secret random key between two parties. We provide a comprehensive introduction to several concepts: quantum mechanics using the density operator formalism, quantum cryptography, and quantum key distribution. We define security for quantum key distribution and outline several mathematical techniques that can either be used to prove security or simplify security proofs. In addition, we analyze the assumptions made in quantum cryptography and how they may or may not be justified in implementations. Along with the review, we propose a framework that decomposes quantum-key-distribution protocols and their assumptions into several classes. Protocol classes can be used to clarify which proof techniques apply to which kinds of protocols. Assumption classes can be used to specify which assumptions are justified in implementations and which could be exploited by an eavesdropper. Two contributions of the author are discussed: the security proofs of two two-way quantum-key-distribution protocols and an intuitive proof of the data-processing inequality.

preprint2015arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.