Uncloneable encryption

2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 581-602
Author(s):  
D. Gottesman

Quantum states cannot be cloned. I show how to extend this property to classical messages encoded using quantum states, a task I call ``uncloneable encryption.'' An uncloneable encryption scheme has the property that an eavesdropper Eve not only cannot read the encrypted message, but she cannot copy it down for later decoding. She could steal it, but then the receiver Bob would not receive the message, and would thus be alerted that something was amiss. I prove that any authentication scheme for quantum states acts as a secure uncloneable encryption scheme. Uncloneable encryption is also closely related to quantum key distribution (QKD), demonstrating a close connection between cryptographic tasks for quantum states and for classical messages. Thus, studying uncloneable encryption and quantum authentication allows for some modest improvements in QKD protocols. While the main results apply to a one-time key with unconditional security, I also show uncloneable encryption remains secure with a pseudorandom key. In this case, to defeat the scheme, Eve must break the computational assumption behind the pseudorandom sequence before Bob receives the message, or her opportunity is lost. This means uncloneable encryption can be used in a non-interactive setting, where QKD is not available, allowing Alice and Bob to convert a temporary computational assumption into a permanently secure message.

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Byoung S. Ham

AbstractSo far, unconditional security in key distribution processes has been confined to quantum key distribution (QKD) protocols based on the no-cloning theorem of nonorthogonal bases. Recently, a completely different approach, the unconditionally secured classical key distribution (USCKD), has been proposed for unconditional security in the purely classical regime. Unlike QKD, both classical channels and orthogonal bases are key ingredients in USCKD, where unconditional security is provided by deterministic randomness via path superposition-based reversible unitary transformations in a coupled Mach–Zehnder interferometer. Here, the first experimental demonstration of the USCKD protocol is presented.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Brown ◽  
Hamza Fawzi ◽  
Omar Fawzi

AbstractThe rates of quantum cryptographic protocols are usually expressed in terms of a conditional entropy minimized over a certain set of quantum states. In particular, in the device-independent setting, the minimization is over all the quantum states jointly held by the adversary and the parties that are consistent with the statistics that are seen by the parties. Here, we introduce a method to approximate such entropic quantities. Applied to the setting of device-independent randomness generation and quantum key distribution, we obtain improvements on protocol rates in various settings. In particular, we find new upper bounds on the minimal global detection efficiency required to perform device-independent quantum key distribution without additional preprocessing. Furthermore, we show that our construction can be readily combined with the entropy accumulation theorem in order to establish full finite-key security proofs for these protocols.


2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 181-186
Author(s):  
Th. Beth ◽  
J. Muller-Quade ◽  
R. Steinwandt

Recently, a quantum key exchange protocol has been described\cite{PFLM04}, which served as basis for securing an actual bank transaction by means of quantum cryptography \cite{ZVS04}. The authentication scheme used to this aim has been proposed by Peev et al. \cite{PML04}. Here we show, that this authentication is insecure in the sense that an attacker can provoke a situation where initiator and responder of a key exchange end up with different keys. Moreover, it may happen that an attacker can decrypt a part of the plaintext protected with the derived encryption key.


2014 ◽  
Vol 112 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zheshen Zhang ◽  
Jacob Mower ◽  
Dirk Englund ◽  
Franco N. C. Wong ◽  
Jeffrey H. Shapiro

2007 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 599-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Inamori ◽  
N. Lütkenhaus ◽  
D. Mayers

2005 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
J.-C. Boileau ◽  
K. Tamaki ◽  
J. Batuwantudawe ◽  
R. Laflamme ◽  
J. M. Renes

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document