Risk Assessment Approach to Estimate Security of Cryptographic Keys in Quantum Cryptography

  • Marcin NiemiecEmail author
  • Miralem Mehic
  • Miroslav Voznak
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 554)


Increased interest in quantum cryptography is observed in recent years. Although this technique is characterized by a very high level of security, there are still challenges of quantum key distribution that should be solved. One of the most important problem remains security mechanisms for the key distillation process which can be effectively controlled by end users. This article presents a new idea for security assessment of cryptographic key based on the risk management in quantum cryptography. This proposal assumes the estimation of risk level using two components: likelihood and impact. The likelihood can be defined by the probability of eavesdropping during the quantum bit estimation. The impact is associated with the effect of key reduction in the all steps of key distillation process. Using this novel approach end users of quantum cryptography will be able to control both efficiency and security level of cryptographic keys.


Security Quantum key distribution Risk assessment Symmetric cryptography 



This work was supported by the ESF in “Science without borders” project, reg. nr. CZ.02.2.69/0.0/0.0/16_027/0008463 within the Operational Programme Research, Development and Education.


  1. 1.
    Mulholland, J., Mosca, M., Braun, J.: The day the cryptography dies. IEEE Secur. Priv. 15(4), 14–21 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li, J., et al.: A survey on quantum cryptography. Chinese J. Electron. 27(2), 223–228 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jekot, M., Niemiec, M.: IT risk assessment and penetration test: comparative analysis of IT controls verification techniques. In: 2016 International Conference on Information and Digital Technologies (IDT), pp. 118–126 (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stoneburner, G., Goguen, A., Feringa, A.: Risk Management Guide for Information Technology Systems. NIST Special Publication 800–30 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Machnik, P.: Comparison of transmission parameters of different IPsec virtual private networks. In: International Conference on Telecommunications and Signal Processing (TSP 2009), Budapest, pp. 132–134 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Assche, G.V.: Quantum Cryptography and Secret-Key Distillation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benslama, M., Benslama, A., Aris, S.: Quantum Cryptography. Quantum Communications in New Telecommunications Systems. Wiley (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wootters, W.K., Zurek, W.H.: A single quantum cannot be cloned. Nature 299, 802–803 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mehic, M., Maurhart, O., Rass, S., Komosny, D., Rezac, F., Voznak, M.: Analysis of the public channel of quantum key distribution link. IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 53(5), 1–8 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dusek, M., Lutkenhaus, N., Hendrych, M.: Quantum Cryptography. Progress in Optics, vol. 46. Elsevier (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bennett, C.H., Brassard, G.: Public key distribution and coin tossing. In: IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems, and Signal Processing, pp. 175–179 (1984)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bennett, C.H., Bessette, F., Brassard, G., Salvail, L., Smolin, J.: Experimental quantum cryptography. J. Cryptol. 5, 3–28 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brassard, G., Salvail, L.: Secret-Key Reconciliation by Public Discussion, pp. 410–423. Springer (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mehic, M., Niemiec, M., Voznak, M.: Calculation of the key length for quantum key distribution. Elektronika Ir Elektrotechnika 21, 81–85 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Niemiec, M., Machnik, P.: Authentication in virtual private networks based on quantum key distribution methods. Multimed. Tools Appl. 75(17), 10691–10707 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hartley, R.V.: Transmission of information. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 7, 535–563 (1928)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Carter, L., Wegman, M.N.: Universal classes of hash functions. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 18, 143–154 (1979)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bennett, C.H., Brassard, G., Robert, J.M.: Privacy amplifcation by public discussion. SIAM J. Comput. 17, 210–229 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcin Niemiec
    • 1
    Email author
  • Miralem Mehic
    • 1
    • 2
  • Miroslav Voznak
    • 1
  1. 1.VSB – Technical University of OstravaOstravaCzechia
  2. 2.Department of Telecommunications, Faculty of Electrical EngineeringUniversity of SarajevoSarajevoBosnia and Herzegovina

Personalised recommendations