Advertisement

Quantum Information Processing

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 687–696 | Cite as

No-signaling quantum key distribution: solution by linear programming

  • Won-Young HwangEmail author
  • Joonwoo Bae
  • Nathan Killoran
Article

Abstract

We outline a straightforward approach for obtaining a secret key rate using only no-signaling constraints and linear programming. Assuming an individual attack, we consider all possible joint probabilities. Initially, we study only the case where Eve has binary outcomes, and we impose constraints due to the no-signaling principle and given measurement outcomes. Within the remaining space of joint probabilities, by using linear programming, we get bound on the probability of Eve correctly guessing Bob’s bit. We then make use of an inequality that relates this guessing probability to the mutual information between Bob and a more general Eve, who is not binary-restricted. Putting our computed bound together with the Csiszár–Körner formula, we obtain a positive key generation rate. The optimal value of this rate agrees with known results, but was calculated in a more straightforward way, offering the potential of generalization to different scenarios.

Keywords

No-signaling principle Quantum key distribution Linear programming 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2010-0007208), and by National Research Foundation and Ministry of Education, Singapore, and the people programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under REA grant agreement N.609305. NK acknowledges the Ontario Graduate Scholarship program for support.

References

  1. 1.
    Bohm, D., Hiley, B.: The Undivided Universe. Routledge, London (1993). introduced in Ref. [2]Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bell, J.S.: Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bell, J.S.: Physics 1, 195 (1964). reprinted in Ref. [2]Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nielsen, M.A., Chuang, I.L.: Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge (2000)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barrett, J., Hardy, L., Kent, A.: No signaling and quantum key distribution. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 010503 (2005)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Acín, A., Gisin, N., Masanes, L.: From Bell’s theorem to secure quantum key distribution. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 010503 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Acín, A., Massar, S., Pironio, S.: Efficient quantum key distribution secure against no-signalling eavesdroppers. New J. Phys. 8, 126 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bennett, C.H., Brassard, G.: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems, and Signal Processing, Bangalore, p. 175. IEEE, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huttner, B., Imoto, N., Gisin, N., Mor, T.: Quantum cryptography with coherent states. Phys. Rev. A 51, 1863 (1995)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mishra, M.K., et al.: Bipartite coherent-state quantum key distribution with strong reference pulse. Quantum Inf. Process. 12, 907 (2013)ADSCrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Barrett, J., Linden, N., Massar, S., Pironio, S., Popescu, S., Roberts, D.: Nonlocal correlations as an information-theoretic resource. Phys. Rev. A 71, 022101 (2005)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jones, N.S., Masanes, L.: Interconversion of nonlocal correlations. Phys. Rev. A 72, 052312 (2005)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pawlowski, M.: Security proof for cryptographic protocols based only on the monogamy of Bell’s inequality violations. Phys. Rev. A 85, 046302 (2012)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hwang, W.-Y., Gittsovich, O.: Security proof for cryptographic protocols based only on the monogamy of Bell’s inequality violations. Phys. Rev. A 85, 046301 (2012)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    With respect to physical implementation, the protocol is almost the same as the Ekert protocol [16]. However, because security is analyzed with a different, though related, point of view, we give a new nameGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pironio, S., Bancal, J.-D., Scarani, V.: Extremal correlations of the tripartite no-signaling polytope. J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 44, 065303 (2011)ADSCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Csiszár, I., Körner, J.: Broadcast channels with confidential messages. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 24, 339 (1978)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gass, S.: Linear Programming: Methods And Applications. Dover Publications, Mineola (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Won-Young Hwang
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Joonwoo Bae
    • 3
    • 4
  • Nathan Killoran
    • 2
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Physics EducationChonnam National UniversityGwangjuRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Physics and Astronomy, Institute for Quantum ComputingUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada
  3. 3.Centre for Quantum TechnologiesNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  4. 4.Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies (FRIAS)University of FreiburgFreiburgGermany
  5. 5.Institut für Theoretische PhysikUniversität UlmUlmGermany

Personalised recommendations