A proposal for founding mistrustful quantum cryptography on coin tossing

A significant branch of classical cryptography deals with the problems which arise when mistrustful parties need to generate, process or exchange information. As Kilian showed a while ago, mistrustful classical cryptography can be founded on a single protocol, oblivious transfer, from which general secure multi-party computations can be built. The scope of mistrustful quantum cryptography is limited by no-go theorems, which rule out, inter alia, unconditionally secure quantum protocols for oblivious transfer or general secure two-party computations. These theorems apply even to protocols which take relativistic signalling constraints into account. The best that can be hoped for, in general, are quantum protocols computationally secure against quantum attack. I describe here a method for building a classically certified bit commitment, and hence every other mistrustful cryptographic task, from a secure coin tossing protocol. No security proof is attempted, but I sketch reasons why these protocols might resist quantum computational attack.Comment: Title altered in deference to Physical Review's fear of question marks. Published version; references update

No Superluminal Signaling Implies Unconditionally Secure Bit Commitment

Bit commitment (BC) is an important cryptographic primitive for an agent to convince a mutually mistrustful party that she has already made a binding choice of 0 or 1 but only to reveal her choice at a later time. Ideally, a BC protocol should be simple, reliable, easy to implement using existing technologies, and most importantly unconditionally secure in the sense that its security is based on an information-theoretic proof rather than computational complexity assumption or the existence of a trustworthy arbitrator. Here we report such a provably secure scheme involving only one-way classical communications whose unconditional security is based on no superluminal signaling (NSS). Our scheme is inspired by the earlier works by Kent, who proposed two impractical relativistic protocols whose unconditional securities are yet to be established as well as several provably unconditionally secure protocols which rely on both quantum mechanics and NSS. Our scheme is conceptually simple and shows for the first time that quantum communication is not needed to achieve unconditional security for BC. Moreover, with purely classical communications, our scheme is practical and easy to implement with existing telecom technologies. This completes the cycle of study of unconditionally secure bit commitment based on known physical laws.Comment: This paper has been withdrawn by the authors due to a crucial oversight on an earlier work by A. Ken

Noise Tolerance of the BB84 Protocol with Random Privacy Amplification

We prove that BB84 protocol with random privacy amplification is secure with a higher key rate than Mayers' estimate with the same error rate. Consequently, the tolerable error rate of this protocol is increased from 7.5 % to 11 %. We also extend this method to the case of estimating error rates separately in each basis, which enables us to securely share a longer key.Comment: 26 pages, 1 figure, version 2 fills a logical gap in the proof. Version 3 includes an upper bound on the mutual information with finete code length by using the decoding error probability of the code. Version 4 adds a paragraph clarifying that no previous paper has proved that the BB84 with random privacy amplification can tolerate the 11% error rat

Beating the PNS attack in practical quantum cryptography

In practical quantum key distribution, weak coherent state is often used and the channel transmittance can be very small therefore the protocol could be totally insecure under the photon-number-splitting attack. We propose an efficient method to verify the upper bound of the fraction of counts caused by multi-photon pluses transmitted from Alice to Bob, given whatever type of Eve's action. The protocol simply uses two coherent states for the signal pulses and vacuum for decoy pulse. Our verified upper bound is sufficiently tight for QKD with very lossy channel, in both asymptotic case and non-asymptotic case. The coherent states with mean photon number from 0.2 to 0.5 can be used in practical quantum cryptography. We show that so far our protocol is the $only$ decoy-state protocol that really works for currently existing set-ups.Comment: So far this is the unique decoy-state protocol which really works efficiently in practice. Prior art results are commented in both main context and the Appendi

On the communication cost of entanglement transformations

We study the amount of communication needed for two parties to transform some given joint pure state into another one, either exactly or with some fidelity. Specifically, we present a method to lower bound this communication cost even when the amount of entanglement does not increase. Moreover, the bound applies even if the initial state is supplemented with unlimited entanglement in the form of EPR pairs, and the communication is allowed to be quantum mechanical. We then apply the method to the determination of the communication cost of asymptotic entanglement concentration and dilution. While concentration is known to require no communication whatsoever, the best known protocol for dilution, discovered by Lo and Popescu [Phys. Rev. Lett. 83(7):1459--1462, 1999], requires a number of bits to be exchanged which is of the order of the square root of the number of EPR pairs. Here we prove a matching lower bound of the same asymptotic order, demonstrating the optimality of the Lo-Popescu protocol up to a constant factor and establishing the existence of a fundamental asymmetry between the concentration and dilution tasks. We also discuss states for which the minimal communication cost is proportional to their entanglement, such as the states recently introduced in the context of ``embezzling entanglement'' [W. van Dam and P. Hayden, quant-ph/0201041].Comment: 9 pages, 1 figure. Added a reference and some further explanations. In v3 some arguments are given in more detai

Coin Tossing is Strictly Weaker Than Bit Commitment

We define cryptographic assumptions applicable to two mistrustful parties who each control two or more separate secure sites between which special relativity guarantees a time lapse in communication. We show that, under these assumptions, unconditionally secure coin tossing can be carried out by exchanges of classical information. We show also, following Mayers, Lo and Chau, that unconditionally secure bit commitment cannot be carried out by finitely many exchanges of classical or quantum information. Finally we show that, under standard cryptographic assumptions, coin tossing is strictly weaker than bit commitment. That is, no secure classical or quantum bit commitment protocol can be built from a finite number of invocations of a secure coin tossing black box together with finitely many additional information exchanges.Comment: Final version; to appear in Phys. Rev. Let

Experimental demonstration of phase-remapping attack in a practical quantum key distribution system

Unconditional security proofs of various quantum key distribution (QKD) protocols are built on idealized assumptions. One key assumption is: the sender (Alice) can prepare the required quantum states without errors. However, such an assumption may be violated in a practical QKD system. In this paper, we experimentally demonstrate a technically feasible "intercept-and-resend" attack that exploits such a security loophole in a commercial "plug & play" QKD system. The resulting quantum bit error rate is 19.7%, which is below the proven secure bound of 20.0% for the BB84 protocol. The attack we utilize is the phase-remapping attack (C.-H. F. Fung, et al., Phys. Rev. A, 75, 32314, 2007) proposed by our group.Comment: 16 pages, 6 figure

Unconditionally Secure Bit Commitment

We describe a new classical bit commitment protocol based on cryptographic constraints imposed by special relativity. The protocol is unconditionally secure against classical or quantum attacks. It evades the no-go results of Mayers, Lo and Chau by requiring from Alice a sequence of communications, including a post-revelation verification, each of which is guaranteed to be independent of its predecessor.Comment: Typos corrected. Reference details added. To appear in Phys. Rev. Let

Alternative schemes for measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution

Practical schemes for measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution using phase and path or time encoding are presented. In addition to immunity to existing loopholes in detection systems, our setup employs simple encoding and decoding modules without relying on polarization maintenance or optical switches. Moreover, by employing a modified sifting technique to handle the dead-time limitations in single-photon detectors, our scheme can be run with only two single-photon detectors. With a phase-postselection technique, a decoy-state variant of our scheme is also proposed, whose key generation rate scales linearly with the channel transmittance.Comment: 30 pages, 5 figure

A classical analogue of entanglement

We show that quantum entanglement has a very close classical analogue, namely secret classical correlations. The fundamental analogy stems from the behavior of quantum entanglement under local operations and classical communication and the behavior of secret correlations under local operations and public communication. A large number of derived analogies follow. In particular teleportation is analogous to the one-time-pad, the concept of ``pure state'' exists in the classical domain, entanglement concentration and dilution are essentially classical secrecy protocols, and single copy entanglement manipulations have such a close classical analog that the majorization results are reproduced in the classical setting. This analogy allows one to import questions from the quantum domain into the classical one, and vice-versa, helping to get a better understanding of both. Also, by identifying classical aspects of quantum entanglement it allows one to identify those aspects of entanglement which are uniquely quantum mechanical.Comment: 13 pages, references update